Study: Global warming could yield $11.6 trillion in increased crop production

[bripat9643]

The AGW cultist insist that a warmer planet will be a catastrophe. We can add that to the list of everything else they are wrong about.

Study: Global warming could yield increased crop production | The Daily Caller

Could global warming be a boon to farmers? A recent study found that rising carbon dioxide concentrations bestow an additional $11.6 trillion in benefits from crop production between now and 2050.

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change found that while many studies focus on the costs of rising carbon emissions, few studies focused on whether or not more carbon in the atmosphere could be beneficial to society.

In fact, the Obama administration recently raised its social-cost-of-carbon estimate from $21 per metric ton to $35 per metric ton to the ire of global warming skeptics and Republicans. The estimate reflects how much each ton of carbon emitted costs the U.S. economy.​

 

[boedicca]

Yep. I've commented several time to the AGW Cult that Global Warming has been very good for humanity (i.e., the Medieval Warming Period).

Of course, the same people who hype AGW also opposed GMO foods such as Golden Rice, which would help improve the lives of billions of people.

 

[Abraham3]

Yep. I've commented several time to the AGW Cult that Global Warming has been very good for humanity (i.e., the Medieval Warming Period).

Of course, the same people who hype AGW also opposed GMO foods such as Golden Rice, which would help improve the lives of billions of people.

You seem like a resonably intelligent young lady. Why do you make such stupid comments? Your second sentence here falls clearly under the rubrik of prejudice. I "hype" AGW and I support GMO foods and nuclear power. That makes your statement demonstrably FALSE.

Think a l-i-t-t-l-e more before you post.

 

[Abraham3]

And, for god's sake, if The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change isn't a front group I'll eat my hat.

 

[Abraham3]

From Sourcewatch.org

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
(Redirected from The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change)


Learn more about corporations VOTING to rewrite our laws.


Learn more from the Center for Media and Democracy's research on climate change.

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change is one of Mother Jones magazine's 2009 global warming skeptic "Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial"[1]. Founded in 1998 by members of the Idso family, its income has increased in recent years.
It employs Science and Public Policy Institute head Robert Ferguson.[2].
Ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council

In August 2011, Center founder and Chairman Craig Idso spoke on "Benefit Analysis of CO2"[3] (previously known as "Warming Up to Climate Change: The Many Benefits of Increased Atmospheric CO2"[4]) at the Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force meeting at the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Annual Meeting.[5] He was accompanied by Robert Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute and MEP Roger Helmer, a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands of Great Britain who represents the Conservative Party and has used his position on the European Parliament to fight increased regulation of member states through the European Union.[5]
About ALEC
ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy's ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

IRS Form 990 information

The Center's 2009 and 2010 IRS 990 report payments to Robert E. Ferguson of SPPI.
The 990 also reported $345,791 for contract labor.
The Center reported income of $25,449 for 2003 [6]; this could be[7] inconsistent with Exxon's reported 2003 donation of $40,000 plus Sarah Scaife Foundation's 2003 donation of $50,000.
Mission

The Center states on its website that its mission is to distribute "factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content" [1].


Work products

The Center produces a weekly online science newsletter called CO2 Science Magazine.

Nonprofit status

The Center is a 501(c)(3), EIN 86-0902777, at a Tempe AZ address; it was founded in 1998.[8]
CO2Science - related, but a separate entity

Craig Idso's group CO2Science is a 501(c)(3) as well; it is EIN 20-2778308, at a Gilbert AZ address, and was founded in 2006.[9], [10]
Funding

Remarkable recent increases
The Center's yearly grants and contributions have increased since 2005:[11]
2009: $1,548,145
2008: $1,065,971
2007: $ 674,725
2006: $ 300,554
2005: $ 25,563
2004: $ 30,422
2003: $ 25,449
Policy: funding, funders kept confidential
On the Center's website, Sherwood B. Idso writes that "our typical response is that we never discuss our funding. Why? Because we believe that ideas about the way the world of nature operates should stand or fall on their own merits, irrespective of the source of support for the person or organization that produces them ... It is self-evident, for example, that one need not know from whence a person's or organization's funding comes in order to evaluate the reasonableness of what they say, if - and this is a very important qualification - one carefully studies the writings of people on both sides of the issue."[12]
The Center states on its website that it "accepts corporate, foundation and individual donations" and that "all donations are kept confidential".[13]
Funding from ExxonMobil
Sherwood Idso confirmed that Exxon "made some donations to us a few times in the past" but attributed this to the fact that "they probably liked what we typically had to say about the issue. But what we had to say then, and what we have to say now, came not, and comes not, from them or any other organization or person."[12]
ExxonMobil's 2001 list of groups it funded listed a $10,000 contribution to the Center in 2001. Center for Science in the Public Interest, "Center for the study of carbon dioxide and global change", Integrity in Science, undated, accessed March 2004. [14]
StopExxon.org reports the Center has received $90,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005 comprising: [15]
2008: 0?[16]
2007: 0[17]
2006: $10,000[15],[18]
2005: $25,000
2003: $40,000
2000: $15,000
1998: $10,000
Funding from Sarah Scaife Foundation
According to MediaTransparency, in 1999 the Center received $50,000 from the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and in 2003 another $50,000 for "General operating support"[19]; but this information may conflict with the Center's 2003 "Grants and contributions" Form 990 numbers above.[20]
Other fossil fuel ties

1999, Western Fuels Association
In October 1999 Craig D. Idso and Keith E. Idso mentioned that they had "recently completed a project commissioned by the Greening Earth Society entitled "Forecasting World Food Supplies: The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration," which we presented at the Second Annual Dixy Lee Ray Memorial Symposium held in Washington, DC on 31 August - 2 September 1999." [21] The Greening Earth Society, a front group of the Western Fuels Association.
2006, Oil industry business: Cenospheres
Craig Idso incorporated Cenospheres.net Inc., serving the oilfield industry, in 2006.[22]
Personnel

Craig Idso, Chairman
Sherwood B. Idso, President, (the father of Keith and Craig)
Keith E. Idso, Vice President
Julene M. Idso, Operations Manager.
Robert E. Ferguson, [23]
Advisors
Donald Paul Hodel, chairman of Summit Power Group, was listed among the "scientific advisors" to the Center.[24] The Center's scientific advisors are: [to be added]
Contact details

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
P.O. Box 25697
Tempe, AZ 85285-5697
USA

Telephone: 480-966-3719
Fax: 480-966-0758
Email: staff AT co2science.org
Web: http://www.co2science.org/center.htm
Articles and Resources

Other SourceWatch resources
Climate change
Idso family
Robert E. Ferguson
Science and Public Policy Institute
References
↑ Josh Harkinson, The Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial: No. 8: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (A.K.A. The Idso Family), Mother Jones, December 4, 2009, Accessed August 26, 2010.
↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 2010 IRS form 990, on Guidestar.org (EIN 86-0902777)
↑ American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC 2011 Annual Meeting Agenda, online meeting agenda, image archived August 3, 2011
↑ American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC 2011 Annual Meeting Agenda, online meeting agenda, image archived July 22, 2011
↑ 5.0 5.1 American Legislative Exchange Council, "Energy, Environment, and Agriculture 2011 Annual Meeting Task Force Meeting," speaker biographies and materials, August 4, 2011, on file with CMD
↑ (as seen on its 2007 Form 990)
↑ But it could also be that the fiscal years don't match up; haven't gone back to check for this possibility
↑ Guidestar on Center
↑ (Though if I read the 990s correctly, it reports income starting in 2005.)
↑ Guidestar on CO2Science
↑ 2005-2009 numbers come from the Center's 2009 IRS Form 990, 2003-2004 from its 2007 990, on Guidestar.org .
↑ 12.0 12.1 Sherwood B. Idso, "What Motivates the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change?", Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, accessed April 2008.
↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, ""Contribute To The Center", accessed April 2008.
↑ Exxon, Public Information and Policy Research", archived file from October 2001, accessed June 2007.
↑ 15.0 15.1 "FACTSHEET: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change", Exxonsecrets.org, accessed June 2007.
↑ (unknown, presumably 0. URL?)
↑ ExxonMobil 2007 Worldwide Giving Report
↑ Exxon 2006 Worldwide Giving Report, accessed March 2011
↑ [Bridge Project link, accessed 2011-03-31
↑ Part of the inconsistency could happen if the fiscal years don't match up; haven't gone back to check for this possibility
↑ Craig D. Idso and Keith E. Idso, "Give Peace a Chance by Giving Plants a Chance", Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Volume 2, Number 19: 1 October 1999.
↑ AZ Corp Comm; It was dissolved in Aug. 2008, a few months after Cenospheres LLC was formed with principals J. Idso and L. Idso. (File #L-1449046-2)
↑ From 2009 IRS form 990, on Guidestar
↑ "CO2 Science," Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change website, accessed July 2008
External Resources
"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change", Wikipedia
External Articles
Josh Harkinson, The Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial: No. 8: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (A.K.A. The Idso Family), Mother Jones, December 4, 2009.
Olive Heffernan, More for the annals of climate misinformation, Nature Blogs, 19 Aug 2008

 

[bripat9643]

From Sourcewatch.org

Source watch is a pinko outfit dedicated to promoting communism, so it can safely be ignored.

 

[Abraham3]

From Sourcewatch.org

Source watch is a pinko outfit dedicated to promoting communism, so it can safely be ignored.

Pinko? Good lord, man, get in the current century, will ya. Sourcewatch is an excellent reference. Try them out on some of your favorite liberal sites.

"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change", on the other hand, is exactly what it sounds to be: a footstool and mouthpiece for the fossil fuel industry.

 

[bripat9643]

From Sourcewatch.org

Source watch is a pinko outfit dedicated to promoting communism, so it can safely be ignored.

Pinko? Good lord, man, get in the current century, will ya. Sourcewatch is an excellent reference. Try them out on some of your favorite liberal sites.

"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change", on the other hand, is exactly what it sounds to be: a footstool and mouthpiece for the fossil fuel industry.

I tried entering "Tides Foundation" and all I got was a lot of fluffly rah rah stuff. Nothing critical of the Tides Foundation, and it didn't go into funding sources like George Soros.

I also noted on the page it return that it had the following ad:

They're back!
The phony Fix the Debt gang is peddling a budget
"deal" that slashes Social Security and Medicare.​

It also announces that it's a product of "The Center for Media and Democracy," a group that is obviously far to the left.

It's definitely pinko and not a trustworthy source.

 

[Abraham3]

Sourcewatch is run by a progressive organization. Be that as it may, the information they posted about the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming was completely correct. They are not an objective source.

Their are objective, academically qualified sources that agree global warming may cause an increase in crop productivity. That information has already been posted. I highly doubt it would reach the magnitude the lead post suggests and there are enormous offsetting affects. But, you don't care about those, do you.

 

[boedicca]

Yep. I've commented several time to the AGW Cult that Global Warming has been very good for humanity (i.e., the Medieval Warming Period).

Of course, the same people who hype AGW also opposed GMO foods such as Golden Rice, which would help improve the lives of billions of people.

You seem like a resonably intelligent young lady. Why do you make such stupid comments? Your second sentence here falls clearly under the rubrik of prejudice. I "hype" AGW and I support GMO foods and nuclear power. That makes your statement demonstrably FALSE.

Think a l-i-t-t-l-e more before you post.

You are a moron.

I'd neg you, but I'd rather save my pos repping for intelligent posters.

 

[Abraham3]

Yep. I've commented several time to the AGW Cult that Global Warming has been very good for humanity (i.e., the Medieval Warming Period).

Of course, the same people who hype AGW also opposed GMO foods such as Golden Rice, which would help improve the lives of billions of people.

You seem like a resonably intelligent young lady. Why do you make such stupid comments? Your second sentence here falls clearly under the rubrik of prejudice. I "hype" AGW and I support GMO foods and nuclear power. That makes your statement demonstrably FALSE.

Think a l-i-t-t-l-e more before you post.

You are a moron.

I'd neg you, but I'd rather save my pos repping for intelligent posters.

Why don't we do a few comparisons:

1) The world population throughout the MWP vs its population today

2) How long it took for the MWP to reach its maximum temperature vs the warming rate we've been experiencing

And then we can tell better whether the current situation promises us as much benefit as our ancestors saw in the MWP.

 

[Abraham3]

From Wikipedia's article:

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP), Medieval Climate Optimum, or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North Atlantic region that may also have been related to other climate events around the world during that time, including in China[1] and other countries,[2][3][3][4][5][6][7] lasting from about AD 950 to 1250.[8] It was followed by a cooler period in the North Atlantic termed the Little Ice Age. Some refer to the event as the Medieval Climatic Anomaly as this term emphasizes that effects other than temperature were important.[9][10]

So, it looks as if the MWP came on over a period of 300 years. Now let's see how warm it got.

Despite substantial uncertainties, especially for the period prior to 1600 for which data is scarce, the warmest period of the last 2,000 years prior to the 20th century very likely occurred between 950 and 1100, but temperatures were probably between 0.1 °C and 0.2 °C below the 1961 to 1990 mean and significantly below the level shown by instrumental data after 1980. Proxy records from different regions show peak warmth at different times during the Medieval Warm Period, indicating the heterogeneous nature of climate at the time.[11] Temperatures in some regions appears to have matched or exceeded recent temperatures in these regions, while globally the Medieval Warm Period was cooler than recent global temperatures.[8]

So, it looks like a rise of 0.7 to 0.8C over 300 years. We have experienced 0.9C rise in 150 years and most of that took place since 1979. But, very conservatively, we can say that modern warming has been taking place at twice the rate of warming during the MWP.

I have to go to the store. Do us a big favor will you and look up the world's population during 950-1250 AD. I'll be back in about 45 minutes.

 

[Mr. H.]

How about the U.S. converting those 39 million acres of ethanol-bound corn to more productive use? Like growing foods that people of the world can eat?

 

[bripat9643]

Sourcewatch is run by a progressive organization. Be that as it may, the information they posted about the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming was completely correct. They are not an objective source.

Their are objective, academically qualified sources that agree global warming may cause an increase in crop productivity. That information has already been posted. I highly doubt it would reach the magnitude the lead post suggests and there are enormous offsetting affects. But, you don't care about those, do you.

I'm definitely not concerned about anything SourceWatch has to say.

 

[bripat9643]

From Wikipedia's article:

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP), Medieval Climate Optimum, or Medieval Climatic Anomaly was a time of warm climate in the North Atlantic region that may also have been related to other climate events around the world during that time, including in China[1] and other countries,[2][3][3][4][5][6][7] lasting from about AD 950 to 1250.[8] It was followed by a cooler period in the North Atlantic termed the Little Ice Age. Some refer to the event as the Medieval Climatic Anomaly as this term emphasizes that effects other than temperature were important.[9][10]

So, it looks as if the MWP came on over a period of 300 years. Now let's see how warm it got.

Despite substantial uncertainties, especially for the period prior to 1600 for which data is scarce, the warmest period of the last 2,000 years prior to the 20th century very likely occurred between 950 and 1100, but temperatures were probably between 0.1 °C and 0.2 °C below the 1961 to 1990 mean and significantly below the level shown by instrumental data after 1980. Proxy records from different regions show peak warmth at different times during the Medieval Warm Period, indicating the heterogeneous nature of climate at the time.[11] Temperatures in some regions appears to have matched or exceeded recent temperatures in these regions, while globally the Medieval Warm Period was cooler than recent global temperatures.[8]

So, it looks like a rise of 0.7 to 0.8C over 300 years. We have experienced 0.9C rise in 150 years and most of that took place since 1979. But, very conservatively, we can say that modern warming has been taking place at twice the rate of warming during the MWP.

I have to go to the store. Do us a big favor will you and look up the world's population during 950-1250 AD. I'll be back in about 45 minutes.

Only numskulls accept Wikipedia as a credible source.

 

[mamooth]

Only numskulls accept Wikipedia as a credible source.

If you see someone railing about how awful Wikipedia is, you're almost certainly looking at a conspiracy theorist. The conspiracy people need an excuse as to why Wikipedia won't give credence to their favorite conspiracy, so they come up with yet another conspiracy about Wikipedia.

Now, Wikipedia isn't the place for in-depth knowledge, but it's a darn good jumping off point on most any subject.

 

[Abraham3]

Actually, I would have said only numbskullls would accept you as a source.

Wikipedia is as accurate as the Encyclopedia Brittanica, heretofore considered the world's most accurate source of general knowledge.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html

And, from the Wikipedia article on Wikipedia's accuracy:

The reliability of Wikipedia (primarily of the English-language edition), compared to other encyclopedias and more specialized sources, has been assessed in many ways, including statistically, through comparative review, analysis of the historical patterns, and strengths and weaknesses inherent in the editing process unique to Wikipedia.[1]
Several studies have been done to assess the reliability of Wikipedia. An early study in the journal Nature said that in 2005, Wikipedia scientific articles came close to the level of accuracy in Encyclopædia Britannica and had a similar rate of "serious errors".[2] The study by Nature was disputed by Encyclopædia Britannica,[3] and later Nature replied to this refutation with both a formal response and a point-by-point rebuttal of Britannica's main objections.[4] Between 2008 and 2012, articles in medical and scientific fields such as pathology,[5] toxicology,[6] oncology,[7] pharmaceuticals,[8] and psychiatry[9] comparing Wikipedia to professional and peer-reviewed sources found that Wikipedia's depth and coverage were of a high standard. Concerns regarding readability were raised in a study published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology[10] and a study published in Psychological Medicine (2012).[9]
Wikipedia is open to anonymous and collaborative editing, so assessments of its reliability usually include examinations of how quickly false or misleading information is removed. An early study conducted by IBM researchers in 2003—two years following Wikipedia's establishment—found that "vandalism is usually repaired extremely quickly—so quickly that most users will never see its effects"[11] and concluded that Wikipedia had "surprisingly effective self-healing capabilities".[12] A 2007 peer-reviewed study stated that "42% of damage is repaired almost immediately... Nonetheless, there are still hundreds of millions of damaged views."[13]
Several incidents have also been publicized in which false information has lasted for a long time in Wikipedia. In May 2005, in the Wikipedia biography controversy, a user added several false and defamatory statements to the biographical article John Seigenthaler.[14] The inaccurate information went unnoticed until September 2005, when they were discovered by a friend of Seigenthaler. After the information was removed from Wikipedia, it remained for another three weeks on sites that mirror Wikipedia content.[15] A biographical article in French Wikipedia portrayed a "Léon-Robert de L'Astran" as an 18th-century anti-slavery ship owner, which led Ségolène Royal, a presidential candidate, to praise him. A student investigation later determined that the article was a hoax and de L'Astran had never existed.[16]

 

[Abraham3]

From the Wikipedia article on world population growth, it looks as if between 950 and 1250 AD the world had 230-330 million people. Let's split the difference and call it 280 million people. The world's current population is 7 billion. That is an increase of 25-fold. Combined with the warming rates we get

(0.9C * 7 billion)/150 years compared to (0.75C * 280 million)/300 years

or

42,000,000 to 700,000

or

60:1

Hmmm..... do you think it will be 60 times as wonderful?

 

[flacaltenn]

From Sourcewatch.org

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
(Redirected from The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change)


Learn more about corporations VOTING to rewrite our laws.


Learn more from the Center for Media and Democracy's research on climate change.

The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change is one of Mother Jones magazine's 2009 global warming skeptic "Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial"[1]. Founded in 1998 by members of the Idso family, its income has increased in recent years.
It employs Science and Public Policy Institute head Robert Ferguson.[2].
Ties to the American Legislative Exchange Council

In August 2011, Center founder and Chairman Craig Idso spoke on "Benefit Analysis of CO2"[3] (previously known as "Warming Up to Climate Change: The Many Benefits of Increased Atmospheric CO2"[4]) at the Energy, Environment and Agriculture Task Force meeting at the 2011 American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Annual Meeting.[5] He was accompanied by Robert Ferguson of the Science and Public Policy Institute and MEP Roger Helmer, a Member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands of Great Britain who represents the Conservative Party and has used his position on the European Parliament to fight increased regulation of member states through the European Union.[5]
About ALEC
ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy's ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

IRS Form 990 information

The Center's 2009 and 2010 IRS 990 report payments to Robert E. Ferguson of SPPI.
The 990 also reported $345,791 for contract labor.
The Center reported income of $25,449 for 2003 [6]; this could be[7] inconsistent with Exxon's reported 2003 donation of $40,000 plus Sarah Scaife Foundation's 2003 donation of $50,000.
Mission

The Center states on its website that its mission is to distribute "factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content" [1].


Work products

The Center produces a weekly online science newsletter called CO2 Science Magazine.

Nonprofit status

The Center is a 501(c)(3), EIN 86-0902777, at a Tempe AZ address; it was founded in 1998.[8]
CO2Science - related, but a separate entity

Craig Idso's group CO2Science is a 501(c)(3) as well; it is EIN 20-2778308, at a Gilbert AZ address, and was founded in 2006.[9], [10]
Funding

Remarkable recent increases
The Center's yearly grants and contributions have increased since 2005:[11]
2009: $1,548,145
2008: $1,065,971
2007: $ 674,725
2006: $ 300,554
2005: $ 25,563
2004: $ 30,422
2003: $ 25,449
Policy: funding, funders kept confidential
On the Center's website, Sherwood B. Idso writes that "our typical response is that we never discuss our funding. Why? Because we believe that ideas about the way the world of nature operates should stand or fall on their own merits, irrespective of the source of support for the person or organization that produces them ... It is self-evident, for example, that one need not know from whence a person's or organization's funding comes in order to evaluate the reasonableness of what they say, if - and this is a very important qualification - one carefully studies the writings of people on both sides of the issue."[12]
The Center states on its website that it "accepts corporate, foundation and individual donations" and that "all donations are kept confidential".[13]
Funding from ExxonMobil
Sherwood Idso confirmed that Exxon "made some donations to us a few times in the past" but attributed this to the fact that "they probably liked what we typically had to say about the issue. But what we had to say then, and what we have to say now, came not, and comes not, from them or any other organization or person."[12]
ExxonMobil's 2001 list of groups it funded listed a $10,000 contribution to the Center in 2001. Center for Science in the Public Interest, "Center for the study of carbon dioxide and global change", Integrity in Science, undated, accessed March 2004. [14]
StopExxon.org reports the Center has received $90,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005 comprising: [15]
2008: 0?[16]
2007: 0[17]
2006: $10,000[15],[18]
2005: $25,000
2003: $40,000
2000: $15,000
1998: $10,000
Funding from Sarah Scaife Foundation
According to MediaTransparency, in 1999 the Center received $50,000 from the Sarah Scaife Foundation, and in 2003 another $50,000 for "General operating support"[19]; but this information may conflict with the Center's 2003 "Grants and contributions" Form 990 numbers above.[20]
Other fossil fuel ties

1999, Western Fuels Association
In October 1999 Craig D. Idso and Keith E. Idso mentioned that they had "recently completed a project commissioned by the Greening Earth Society entitled "Forecasting World Food Supplies: The Impact of the Rising Atmospheric CO2 Concentration," which we presented at the Second Annual Dixy Lee Ray Memorial Symposium held in Washington, DC on 31 August - 2 September 1999." [21] The Greening Earth Society, a front group of the Western Fuels Association.
2006, Oil industry business: Cenospheres
Craig Idso incorporated Cenospheres.net Inc., serving the oilfield industry, in 2006.[22]
Personnel

Craig Idso, Chairman
Sherwood B. Idso, President, (the father of Keith and Craig)
Keith E. Idso, Vice President
Julene M. Idso, Operations Manager.
Robert E. Ferguson, [23]
Advisors
Donald Paul Hodel, chairman of Summit Power Group, was listed among the "scientific advisors" to the Center.[24] The Center's scientific advisors are: [to be added]
Contact details

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
P.O. Box 25697
Tempe, AZ 85285-5697
USA

Telephone: 480-966-3719
Fax: 480-966-0758
Email: staff AT co2science.org
Web: http://www.co2science.org/center.htm
Articles and Resources

Other SourceWatch resources
Climate change
Idso family
Robert E. Ferguson
Science and Public Policy Institute
References
↑ Josh Harkinson, The Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial: No. 8: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (A.K.A. The Idso Family), Mother Jones, December 4, 2009, Accessed August 26, 2010.
↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 2010 IRS form 990, on Guidestar.org (EIN 86-0902777)
↑ American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC 2011 Annual Meeting Agenda, online meeting agenda, image archived August 3, 2011
↑ American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC 2011 Annual Meeting Agenda, online meeting agenda, image archived July 22, 2011
↑ 5.0 5.1 American Legislative Exchange Council, "Energy, Environment, and Agriculture 2011 Annual Meeting Task Force Meeting," speaker biographies and materials, August 4, 2011, on file with CMD
↑ (as seen on its 2007 Form 990)
↑ But it could also be that the fiscal years don't match up; haven't gone back to check for this possibility
↑ Guidestar on Center
↑ (Though if I read the 990s correctly, it reports income starting in 2005.)
↑ Guidestar on CO2Science
↑ 2005-2009 numbers come from the Center's 2009 IRS Form 990, 2003-2004 from its 2007 990, on Guidestar.org .
↑ 12.0 12.1 Sherwood B. Idso, "What Motivates the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change?", Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, accessed April 2008.
↑ Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, ""Contribute To The Center", accessed April 2008.
↑ Exxon, Public Information and Policy Research", archived file from October 2001, accessed June 2007.
↑ 15.0 15.1 "FACTSHEET: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change", Exxonsecrets.org, accessed June 2007.
↑ (unknown, presumably 0. URL?)
↑ ExxonMobil 2007 Worldwide Giving Report
↑ Exxon 2006 Worldwide Giving Report, accessed March 2011
↑ [Bridge Project link, accessed 2011-03-31
↑ Part of the inconsistency could happen if the fiscal years don't match up; haven't gone back to check for this possibility
↑ Craig D. Idso and Keith E. Idso, "Give Peace a Chance by Giving Plants a Chance", Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Volume 2, Number 19: 1 October 1999.
↑ AZ Corp Comm; It was dissolved in Aug. 2008, a few months after Cenospheres LLC was formed with principals J. Idso and L. Idso. (File #L-1449046-2)
↑ From 2009 IRS form 990, on Guidestar
↑ "CO2 Science," Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change website, accessed July 2008
External Resources
"Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change", Wikipedia
External Articles
Josh Harkinson, The Dirty Dozen of Climate Change Denial: No. 8: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (A.K.A. The Idso Family), Mother Jones, December 4, 2009.
Olive Heffernan, More for the annals of climate misinformation, Nature Blogs, 19 Aug 2008

Dont care... Whether their statements are right or wrong is what matters..
u have a problem with the fact we got to the moon with the help of nazi scientists?

 

[flacaltenn]

Sourcewatch is run by a progressive organization. Be that as it may, the information they posted about the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming was completely correct. They are not an objective source.

Their are objective, academically qualified sources that agree global warming may cause an increase in crop productivity. That information has already been posted. I highly doubt it would reach the magnitude the lead post suggests and there are enormous offsetting affects. But, you don't care about those, do you.

They are excellent in one post. In your next you admit they are run by the left fringe.

They are dismissed as objective judgements of political tiesr. They could still be right about tying this OP to funding from energy sources. Doesnt matter....