daveman
Diamond Member
As it turns out, yes, they do.
Global Warming: Follow the Money | National Review
Mann is typical of pro-warming scientists who have taken millions from government agencies. The federal government ā which will gain unprecedented regulatory power if climate legislation is passed ā has funded scientific research to the tune of $32.5 billion since 1989, according the Science and Public Policy Institute. That is an amount that dwarfs research contributions from oil companies and utilities, which have historically funded both sides of the debate.
Mann, for example, has received some $6 million, mostly in government grants ā according to a study by The American Spectator ā including $500,000 in federal stimulus money while he was under investigation for his Climategate e-mails.
Follow the money, IPCC/AGW editionMann, for example, has received some $6 million, mostly in government grants ā according to a study by The American Spectator ā including $500,000 in federal stimulus money while he was under investigation for his Climategate e-mails.
No one in the world exercised more influence on the events leading up to the Copenhagen conference on global warming than Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the UNās Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and mastermind of its latest report in 2007.
Although Dr Pachauri is often presented as a scientist (he was even once described by the BBC as āthe worldās top climate scientistā), as a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics he has no qualifications in climate science at all.
What has also almost entirely escaped attention, however, is how Dr Pachauri has established an astonishing worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCCās policy recommendations.
These outfits include banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds heavily involved in ācarbon tradingā and āsustainable technologiesā, which together make up the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.
Today, in addition to his role as chairman of the IPCC, Dr Pachauri occupies more than a score of such posts, acting as director or adviser to many of the bodies which play a leading role in what has become known as the international āclimate industryā.
It is remarkable how only very recently has the staggering scale of Dr Pachauriās links to so many of these concerns come to light, inevitably raising questions as to how the worldās leading āclimate officialā can also be personally involved in so many organisations which stand to benefit from the IPCCās recommendations.
There's Big Money in Global Warming Alarmism | The StreamAlthough Dr Pachauri is often presented as a scientist (he was even once described by the BBC as āthe worldās top climate scientistā), as a former railway engineer with a PhD in economics he has no qualifications in climate science at all.
What has also almost entirely escaped attention, however, is how Dr Pachauri has established an astonishing worldwide portfolio of business interests with bodies which have been investing billions of dollars in organisations dependent on the IPCCās policy recommendations.
These outfits include banks, oil and energy companies and investment funds heavily involved in ācarbon tradingā and āsustainable technologiesā, which together make up the fastest-growing commodity market in the world, estimated soon to be worth trillions of dollars a year.
Today, in addition to his role as chairman of the IPCC, Dr Pachauri occupies more than a score of such posts, acting as director or adviser to many of the bodies which play a leading role in what has become known as the international āclimate industryā.
It is remarkable how only very recently has the staggering scale of Dr Pachauriās links to so many of these concerns come to light, inevitably raising questions as to how the worldās leading āclimate officialā can also be personally involved in so many organisations which stand to benefit from the IPCCās recommendations.
Weāre not done: we still have to add the dozens of Solyndra-type companies eager to sell the government products, to get āgreenā subsidies or to support its global-warming agenda. Included in that list are oil companies. Oil companies?
Yes. Oil giants arenāt foolish. They want to benefit ā and also donāt want to suffer from ā the mania that surrounds all things climate change. Their activities are often mercenary: Oil companies will and do fund research that casts a bad light on coal, its main competitor, in hopes of lessening competition but also in expectation of securing peace with activist groups.
For instance, ExxonMobil recently pledged to give Stanford University āup to $100 million in grant money over 10 years to support climate and energy research.ā As reported by the website No Tricks Zone:
Four big international companies, including the oil giant ExxonMobil, said yesterday that they would give Stanford University $225 million over 10 years for research on ways to meet growing energy needs without worsening global warming ā¦ In 2000, Ford and Exxon Mobilās global rival, BP, gave $20 million to Princeton to start a similar climate and energy research program ā¦
Shell Oil since 1999 handed out $8.5 million in environmental grants. Like ExxonMobil, many grants flowed to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, but $1.2 million went to the Nature Conservancy; the remainder was spread to several different environmentally-minded groups.
According to The Washington Times British Petroleum regularly gave to several environmental groups, such as āNature Conservancy, the World Wildlife Fund, the World Resources Institute, various branches of the Audubon Society, the Wildlife Habitat Council.ā Itās important to understand that these groups accepted the money BP gave them. The Washington Post confirms the Nature Conservancy pocketed over ā$10 million in cash and land contributions from BP and affiliated corporations.ā
Joanne Nova has documented the massive amount of money pouring from government into the pockets of individuals and groups associated with the environment. āThe U.S. government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks.ā $79 billion.
