Can ANYONE refute the claims of "Corporate Ties"?

[Crick]

Show us a single instance in which Hansen signed a contract under false terms. Show us a single instance in which he lied to a publisher about a conflict of interest. The crime wasn't taking the funding. The crime was lying about it.

 

[IanC]

"
Improper Receipt of Outside Income Without Obtaining Advance Permission

Hansen’s 2009 speech at Dartmouth University for a $5,000 honorarium and up to $1,000 in expenses came in violation of the clear rule against promoting his appearances as, or emphasizing his job with, NASA. It also had not been approved. NASA’s Deputy Chief Counsel Laura Giza, after admonishing these violations, demanded he return the improperly obtained money:

“[Y]ou may not accept the offered honorarium and travel expenses. If you’ve already received this money, you need to return it to Dartmouth.

“Also, in the future, if you have not received word that one of your outside activity requests has been approved, or at least that the legal office has concurred in the request, you should contact the Goddard legal office about the request before engaging in that activity. NASA regulations require that you obtain approval for certain outside activities…prior to engaging in that activity. 5 CFR 6901.103(d).”

If there were further correspondence about this demand it would be in NASA’s document production, but there are no such records. The only lawful scenario, therefore, is that Hansen quietly agreed to the demand, but did not inform NASA whether he complied. Otherwise, NASA, Hansen, or both have violated the ethics and/or transparency statutes and regulation.

Yet subsequent financial disclosure forms show Hansen attesting to accepting even more money, between $5,001 and $15,000, for a 2008 speech at Illinois Wesleyan University for which his file, according to NASA, contains no request for permission to engage in this outside employment, or approval to do so (each a condition precedent to lawfully engage in the activity, and to accepting the money).

There is no correspondence about these two glaring discrepancies in his filings reflecting more apparently improperly accepted outside income than most federal employees will ever see in their careers.

Dr. James Hansen s growing financial scandal now over a million dollars of outside income Watts Up With That

the first comment on this article tells it all

[Hansen is] Like most on the left, rules are for the little people.

 

[skookerasbil]

The doo doo on the climate change industry has grown to almost mythical levels.

But the fact is, all the pols are pwned by special interests bs on both sides and nobody seems to give a crap. None of these bozo's are looking out for me or my family. The fact is, the banks now control ALL the markets and are taking their mega-profits and fcuk the consumer, which, by the way, is exactly why fossil fuels will continue to dominate for decades no mater how many billions of internet posts the global warming folks post up...............no matter what the science is. The profit margin on solar power is dick for the banks compared to what use of fossil fuels bring them.

duh


Is EVERY Market Rigged Washington s Blog

Washingtons Blog Big Banks Manipulated Gold and Silver Markets. . . they do another terrific reporting job 2012 What s the real truth


Energy Markets Are Manipulated The Big Picture



What can I say?

Im just not one of these stick your head in the sand guys!!

 

[bripat9643]

"
Improper Receipt of Outside Income Without Obtaining Advance Permission

Hansen’s 2009 speech at Dartmouth University for a $5,000 honorarium and up to $1,000 in expenses came in violation of the clear rule against promoting his appearances as, or emphasizing his job with, NASA. It also had not been approved. NASA’s Deputy Chief Counsel Laura Giza, after admonishing these violations, demanded he return the improperly obtained money:

“[Y]ou may not accept the offered honorarium and travel expenses. If you’ve already received this money, you need to return it to Dartmouth.

“Also, in the future, if you have not received word that one of your outside activity requests has been approved, or at least that the legal office has concurred in the request, you should contact the Goddard legal office about the request before engaging in that activity. NASA regulations require that you obtain approval for certain outside activities…prior to engaging in that activity. 5 CFR 6901.103(d).”

If there were further correspondence about this demand it would be in NASA’s document production, but there are no such records. The only lawful scenario, therefore, is that Hansen quietly agreed to the demand, but did not inform NASA whether he complied. Otherwise, NASA, Hansen, or both have violated the ethics and/or transparency statutes and regulation.

Yet subsequent financial disclosure forms show Hansen attesting to accepting even more money, between $5,001 and $15,000, for a 2008 speech at Illinois Wesleyan University for which his file, according to NASA, contains no request for permission to engage in this outside employment, or approval to do so (each a condition precedent to lawfully engage in the activity, and to accepting the money).

There is no correspondence about these two glaring discrepancies in his filings reflecting more apparently improperly accepted outside income than most federal employees will ever see in their careers.

Dr. James Hansen s growing financial scandal now over a million dollars of outside income Watts Up With That

the first comment on this article tells it all

[Hansen is] Like most on the left, rules are for the little people.

OOOOOOOOOOOH, that's gotta hurt!

 

[jc456]

it is so blatant asshat. Hilarious stuff to say the least. Did I say hilarious

 

[Crick]

How about we treat Micheal Mann, James Hansen, and every other climate scientist the same way too... tell them all to resign..

The hypocrisy of the left is stunning..If its not my way they need to apologize and resign... Who the **** do the left think they are?

When you find some evidence that Mann and Hansen have done what Soon has done, I'll be right behind you. Till then, it's YOU that has the lock on hypocrisy around here Billy.

What Hansen did is doctor his data and contrive algorithms to produce the desired results regardless of the input. He also refused to publish his data or turn over his emails at the university of Pennsylvania even though they are public property and subject to FOI laws.

Perhaps if you had reviewed some evidence in an attempt to support your charges you might have noticed that you seem to be conflating Hansen and Mann. Hansen was never at UPenn and no one was ever after his emails. That was the whack job Ken Cuuccinelli when he was trying to persecute Mann to gain a following with a few more right wing voters.

Mann's "white wash" by Penn State was epic. Mann was consulted about what was relevant or not relevant in his case and no witnesses were called nor were the ones stating the allegations allowed to rebut. IT was a total white wash and Penn State lost all credibility as a scientific institution.

"
Improper Receipt of Outside Income Without Obtaining Advance Permission

Hansen’s 2009 speech at Dartmouth University for a $5,000 honorarium and up to $1,000 in expenses came in violation of the clear rule against promoting his appearances as, or emphasizing his job with, NASA. It also had not been approved. NASA’s Deputy Chief Counsel Laura Giza, after admonishing these violations, demanded he return the improperly obtained money:

“[Y]ou may not accept the offered honorarium and travel expenses. If you’ve already received this money, you need to return it to Dartmouth.

“Also, in the future, if you have not received word that one of your outside activity requests has been approved, or at least that the legal office has concurred in the request, you should contact the Goddard legal office about the request before engaging in that activity. NASA regulations require that you obtain approval for certain outside activities…prior to engaging in that activity. 5 CFR 6901.103(d).”

If there were further correspondence about this demand it would be in NASA’s document production, but there are no such records. The only lawful scenario, therefore, is that Hansen quietly agreed to the demand, but did not inform NASA whether he complied. Otherwise, NASA, Hansen, or both have violated the ethics and/or transparency statutes and regulation.

Yet subsequent financial disclosure forms show Hansen attesting to accepting even more money, between $5,001 and $15,000, for a 2008 speech at Illinois Wesleyan University for which his file, according to NASA, contains no request for permission to engage in this outside employment, or approval to do so (each a condition precedent to lawfully engage in the activity, and to accepting the money).

There is no correspondence about these two glaring discrepancies in his filings reflecting more apparently improperly accepted outside income than most federal employees will ever see in their careers.

Dr. James Hansen s growing financial scandal now over a million dollars of outside income Watts Up With That

the first comment on this article tells it all

[Hansen is] Like most on the left, rules are for the little people.

OOOOOOOOOOOH, that's gotta hurt!

Did Hansen have a conflict of interest? Did he ever lie to his publishers and thus to their readership? Was he taking money from an organization in exchange for publishing conclusion in his sponsor's favor? What was the effect on Hansen's science work of accepting an Honorarium from Dartmouth for speaking?

You people are pathetic.

 

[bripat9643]

How about we treat Micheal Mann, James Hansen, and every other climate scientist the same way too... tell them all to resign..

The hypocrisy of the left is stunning..If its not my way they need to apologize and resign... Who the **** do the left think they are?

When you find some evidence that Mann and Hansen have done what Soon has done, I'll be right behind you. Till then, it's YOU that has the lock on hypocrisy around here Billy.

What Hansen did is doctor his data and contrive algorithms to produce the desired results regardless of the input. He also refused to publish his data or turn over his emails at the university of Pennsylvania even though they are public property and subject to FOI laws.

Perhaps if you had reviewed some evidence in an attempt to support your charges you might have noticed that you seem to be conflating Hansen and Mann. Hansen was never at UPenn and no one was ever after his emails. That was the whack job Ken Cuuccinelli when he was trying to persecute Mann to gain a following with a few more right wing voters.

Mann's "white wash" by Penn State was epic. Mann was consulted about what was relevant or not relevant in his case and no witnesses were called nor were the ones stating the allegations allowed to rebut. IT was a total white wash and Penn State lost all credibility as a scientific institution.

"
Improper Receipt of Outside Income Without Obtaining Advance Permission

Hansen’s 2009 speech at Dartmouth University for a $5,000 honorarium and up to $1,000 in expenses came in violation of the clear rule against promoting his appearances as, or emphasizing his job with, NASA. It also had not been approved. NASA’s Deputy Chief Counsel Laura Giza, after admonishing these violations, demanded he return the improperly obtained money:

“[Y]ou may not accept the offered honorarium and travel expenses. If you’ve already received this money, you need to return it to Dartmouth.

“Also, in the future, if you have not received word that one of your outside activity requests has been approved, or at least that the legal office has concurred in the request, you should contact the Goddard legal office about the request before engaging in that activity. NASA regulations require that you obtain approval for certain outside activities…prior to engaging in that activity. 5 CFR 6901.103(d).”

If there were further correspondence about this demand it would be in NASA’s document production, but there are no such records. The only lawful scenario, therefore, is that Hansen quietly agreed to the demand, but did not inform NASA whether he complied. Otherwise, NASA, Hansen, or both have violated the ethics and/or transparency statutes and regulation.

Yet subsequent financial disclosure forms show Hansen attesting to accepting even more money, between $5,001 and $15,000, for a 2008 speech at Illinois Wesleyan University for which his file, according to NASA, contains no request for permission to engage in this outside employment, or approval to do so (each a condition precedent to lawfully engage in the activity, and to accepting the money).

There is no correspondence about these two glaring discrepancies in his filings reflecting more apparently improperly accepted outside income than most federal employees will ever see in their careers.

Dr. James Hansen s growing financial scandal now over a million dollars of outside income Watts Up With That

the first comment on this article tells it all

[Hansen is] Like most on the left, rules are for the little people.

OOOOOOOOOOOH, that's gotta hurt!

Did Hansen have a conflict of interest? Did he ever lie to his publishers and thus to their readership? Was he taking money from an organization in exchange for publishing conclusion in his sponsor's favor? What was the effect on Hansen's science work of accepting an Honorarium from Dartmouth for speaking?

You people are pathetic.

Of course he had a conflict of interest. He was violating the terms of his employment contract and getting rich by telling the public what his benefactors wanted them to hear. Like algore, Hansen made big money promoting the AGW hocus-pocus. He's a charlatan and con artist. He was also caught fudging the data of a government agency. He committed fraud. Somehow you see nothing wrong with that.

 

[Billy_Bob]

You want to talk Conflict of Interests... They are going after Roger Pike Jr. who is a lukewarmer but has presented scientific research that disproves the AGW meme.

To be clear on Pielke’s point, Romm is paid to run the political attack blog “Climate Progress” by the Center for American Progress, a progressive (liberal) political action group in Washington, DC. according to his bio there. According the the lastest IRS form 990 on file (required for tax exempt 501c3 organizations) Romm’s outfit collected over 39 million dollars in revenue in 2012. See form 990 here: CAP_300126510_2012_09818b30

The Center for American Progress has a long history of big political money:


Funny how Joe Romm didn’t see the need to disclose such potential conflicts of interest to a highly paid political organization that politicizes climate, while writing a scientific paper about climate. Meanwhile his blog attacks Willie Soon saying:

Climate Deniers’ Favorite Scientist Quietly Took Money From The Fossil Fuel Industry

Joe, pot, kettle.

The label “paid shill” doesn’t really do justice here to Romm’s hypocrisy.

Source


I would dare say Joe Romm is clearly a bigger threat than Willie Soon is.. The dollar amounts are staggering... Can yo say CONFLICT OF INTERESTS...

 

[Crick]

I would dare say you don't seem to have a clue (or you do but you're simply dishonest) what constitutes a conflict of interest.

Please explain how being a Fellow for the Center for American Progress (Center for American Progress - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia) is a conflict of interest for Dr Romm.

 

[Crick]

For example, here's a lead article from the Climate section of Think Progress's website Why A Congressman s Probe Of Climate Denier Scientists Funding Might Not Be A Great Idea ThinkProgress

 

[skookerasbil]

Crick my friend.......check out the links I posted a few posts back. Seriously. At the end of the day, the energy markets are rigged by the banks. All else will follow in terms of how climate science affects public policy. All predicated on the bottom line..............pretty much everything else we discuss in here, on either side, is drivel. My stuff..............your stuff. We are mere pawns. This is why climate science has had such a minor impact on public policy in the past 20 years..........the fix is in. The banks will leverage whatever profits renewable energy can bring them which is somewhat significant but not anywhere near what.............on the margin..........fossil fuels can bring them. This is why I say all the time the science doesn't matter. Its just a statement of fact........has nothing to do with the argument on who is right or wrong on the issue of whether the world is warming due to C02 or not.

It matters not who is in charge.......Obama......Hillary.......Jeb Bush.........Chris Christie..........whoever it is, one thing is for certain. You.....me.........every forum member here falls deeper and deeper into the abyss............year by year, in terms of our economic status. Millions all over the country are falling into foreclosue as we speak.........its not being reported. The herding process continues unabated but at a pace that nobody is noticing. The rich get richer and guys like you and me get nickeled and dimed to death by these ******* phoney politicians that bow at the feet of the big banks. Climate science is a part of the distraction..............just like this BS going on with ISIS = completely fabricated BS. Keep everybody afraid of something while the banks make their trillions.

FOX, CNN, MSNBC, BBC et. al...........all on board in the distraction industry........and arm of the bank/government collaboration.

It is what it is............


Are The Markets Rigged Zero Hedge

Whistleblower Energy Market Is Rigged - Business Insider


Fed Showered Money On Foreign Banks

BREAKING BAD DEBT - EPISODE ONE Washington s Blog


5 major US banks control 97 of all credit derivative swaps


Why won t the Fed admit that big banks have too much power in the mortgage market Quartz



Crick.......people think 2008 was bad. The next crash is going to change our lives forever and its going to come out of nowhere ( to the sheep ) but there will certainly be a scapegoat. These fuckers know its imminent too!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Can anyone refute that it's 4 ******* degrees here today

 

[skookerasbil]

Heat wave by me............6 degrees!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

For example, here's a lead article from the Climate section of Think Progress's website Why A Congressman s Probe Of Climate Denier Scientists Funding Might Not Be A Great Idea ThinkProgress

Why are we still funding it at all??? The science is settled, go home

 

[bripat9643]

I would dare say you don't seem to have a clue (or you do but you're simply dishonest) what constitutes a conflict of interest.

Please explain how being a Fellow for the Center for American Progress (Center for American Progress - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia) is a conflict of interest for Dr Romm.

BWHAHAHAHAHA!

You're serious?

 

[Billy_Bob]

I would dare say you don't seem to have a clue (or you do but you're simply dishonest) what constitutes a conflict of interest.

Please explain how being a Fellow for the Center for American Progress (Center for American Progress - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia) is a conflict of interest for Dr Romm.

To Funny;

Dripping in hypocrisy, Romm clearly has millions of dollars of conflict from many ;left wing corporations and advocacy groups,yet he is to be trusted simply because he is an AGW true believer....

From the 'Mine are ok but yours are not".... files.... Left wit moron hypocrite..

 

[Billy_Bob]

For example, here's a lead article from the Climate section of Think Progress's website Why A Congressman s Probe Of Climate Denier Scientists Funding Might Not Be A Great Idea ThinkProgress

Says the man USING ROMM"S own Site as PROOF! FUckwitmoron.

 

[mamooth]

Cry for us more, deniers. Your bitter tears are like a sweet-but-bitter nectar. Understand that your crying won't stop us from exposing your leaders as frauds, and laughing in your faces as we do it.

You deniers originated the investigation tactics, so you can't complain that we're using your own tactics to expose you. Yes, you'll still try to complain, but you'll just look ridiculous and hypocritcal. Such lovely poetic justice.

By the way, there's an ultra-violent grossout movie out that deniers are required to profess adoration for now, being the villain is a greenie type. Title ... I forget ... let me check ... "Kingsman: The Secret Service". Go check with your masters for details on why you must spend money on the movie.

 

[Dot Com]

For all, make damned sure that you post links to your sources. If you are someone with an education, and are pointing out the reality of what is happening, then your thread will be shut down. If you are a 'sceptic' you can post all the graphs and paragraphs you wish without links, no problem. Now that is an observable fact on this board. Just look at the posts of Elektra and Billy Bob.

 

[bripat9643]

Cry for us more, deniers. Your bitter tears are like a sweet-but-bitter nectar. Understand that your crying won't stop us from exposing your leaders as frauds, and laughing in your faces as we do it.

You deniers originated the investigation tactics, so you can't complain that we're using your own tactics to expose you. Yes, you'll still try to complain, but you'll just look ridiculous and hypocritcal. Such lovely poetic justice.

By the way, there's an ultra-violent grossout movie out that deniers are required to profess adoration for now, being the villain is a greenie type. Title ... I forget ... let me check ... "Kingsman: The Secret Service". Go check with your masters for details on why you must spend money on the movie.

Climate sceptics invented the smear tactics so favored by the left? Could you provide an example of sceptics smearing anyone?