Guardian Admits Skeptics Not Funded For The Past Seven Years

Someone better call up Naomi Orsekes, and tell her that skeptics haven’t being funded since 2008.

ScreenHunter_9892 Jul. 08 21.20

Exxon knew of climate change in 1981, email says – but it funded deniers for 27 more years | Environment | The Guardian

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Guardian Admits Skeptics Not Funded For The Past Seven Years

  1. pinroot says:

    Meanwhile, government funded alarmists keep on getting paid.

  2. This is weird, because I still keep getting my ExxonMobil checks. Shhhh, don’t tell them.

  3. I had one of the same idiots telling me that less than 30 years trend can be ignored.
    I pointed out that after the global cooling trend till the peak in 1998 was less than 27 years.

    They really do not like it when they prove themselves wrong!!

  4. AndyG55 says:

    HOLY C**P has anyone seen the latest at WUWT !!

    How does ANYONE get away with this.. a company making this sort adjustment to data would be up on major FRAUD charges very quickly, but these guys seem to get away with it.

    UN- BE- LEIV-ABLE !!

    • Gail Combs says:

      About time Anthony saw the light. Too bad he had to smear Steve first and give the Activists plenty of ammo to use against skeptics.

      • emsnews says:

        He owes Steven a HUGE apology.

        Note that his site takes credit for figuring out the obvious. 🙂

        • Gail Combs says:

          I posted three of Steve’s graphs on the US temperature.

          I normally do not comment at WUWT anymore.

        • gator69 says:

          Good. I was tempted to let Watts know he owes Tony an apology, but like you I seldom post there anymore.

        • Gail Combs says:

          The graphs cause a bit of a flurry and some attacks. I then posted this:

          mellyren This is the CORRECT WAY to treat historical data.

          (gray is error range)

          The product of manipulations is not data and should never be called data. Also the treatment of the data to get the ‘product’ should be meticulously documented or it is not even science!

          Also, at least for USA data, the turn of the century error is already known. The original system had two separate thermometers according to the instructions written and given out to the observers in 1882. One mercury for the high temperature and an alcohol thermometer for the minimum temperature.

          In the 1918 bookMeteorology: A Text-book on the Weather, the Causes of Its Changes, and Weather Forecasting By Willis Isbister Milham, Milham mentions the Six thermometer and says the accuracy was not good so the US weather service used the two thermometers mentioned above. He also states there are 180 to 200 ‘regular weather stations’ ordinarily in the larger cities, 3600 to 4000 coop stations run by volunteers and 300 to 500 special stations.

          On page 68
          Milham says a thermometer in a Stevenson screen is correct to within a half degree. It is most in error on still days, hot or cold. “In both cases the indications of the sheltered thermometers are two conservative.”

          on Page 70
          “The Ventilated thermometer which is the best instrument for determining the real air temperature, was invented by Assman at Berlin in 1887…will determine the real air temperature correctly to a tenth of a degree.”

          I also thought it quite interesting that Willis Isbister Milham was talking about 20 years of hourly data in 1918.

          The observations of temperature taken at a regular station are the real air temperature at 8am and 8pm, the highest and lowest temperatures of the preceding 12 hours, and a continuous thermograph record…. [Richard Freres thermograph] ….these instruments are located in a thermometer shelter which is ordinarily placed 6 to 10 feet above the roof of some high building in the city. At a Cooperative station the highest and lowest temperatures during a day are determined, and also the reading of the maximum thermometer just after it has been set. The purpose of taking this observation is to make sure that the maximum thermometer has been set and also to give the real air temperature at the time of observation….

          As far as I can tell the ClimAstrologists completely ignored the historical information when making their decisions to change data.

      • DD More says:

        I have posted at WUWT this message

        So Tony what have your detractors to the original identification come up with? After all, A. Watts posted –
        NCDC needs to step up and fix this along with other problems that have been identified.And they are, I expect some sort of a statement, and possibly a correction next week. In the meantime, let’s let them do their work and go through their methodology. It will not be helpful to ANYONE if we start beating up the people at NCDC ahead of such a statement and/or correction. I will be among the first, if not the first to know what they are doing to fix the issues, and as soon as I know, so will all of you. Patience and restraint is what we need at the moment. I believe they are making a good faith effort, but as you all know the government moves slowly, they have to get policy wonks to review documents and all that. So, we’ll likely hear something early next week.

        Note the date, over a year ago and has any one read about any corrections and from the above now near 45% (up 5%) still fake they are only making more.

        Still no WUWT response.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Do not expect one. Anthony listens to L.S. and Zeke Hausfeather.

          After years and years not to mention the Climategate e-mails and Jim Hansen’s blatant activism, you have to be in very very serious denial to give NASA/NOAA any credit for integrity and honesty any more.

          Heck in the spring of 2012 49 Former NASA Scientists Send A Letter Disputing Climate Change It is getting pretty bad and pretty obvious when former employees start protesting the smearing of the name they made for NASA.

          Unfortunately nothing short of a glacier sitting on top of their house will ever get through to the ClimAstrologists and the Lukewarmers who are in denial. Heck even then they will just claim Global Warming causes Ice Ages.

        • Beale says:

          Where did you post this (on what thread?)

  5. Justa Joe says:

    I’ve known about Bigfoot since 1978.

  6. gator69 says:

    Over the years, Exxon spent more than $30m on thinktanks and researchers that promoted climate denial, according to Greenpeace.

    Now there’s a credible source! But even if true, that is still only 1 miilon per year…

    This document shows a $21,408,000,000 climate slush fund in 2014, for the US alone! I am sure there is more that this budget does not show, but 21.4 billion dollars is still at least 21 billion too much, and $21,407,000,000 per year more than Exxon.

    The total is found on page 45, and page 5 explains figures are in millions of dollars.

    • Snowleopard says:

      Likely the bankers who own the major oil companies allowed them to support some “deniers” to a token extent. Just enough support that all realists could be painted with the oilboy brush. If the oil companies were really interested in supporting reality(denial) the amounts expended would have been orders of magnitude higher. Obviously the major extraction benefits of a carbon trading scheme (banker percentage = world economy tax paid to bankers) are much more important to the bankers than the minor associated costs to their oil corps.

      • gator69 says:

        I have worked for major banks for many years, and we did not own a single oil rig. What is actually likely is that oil companies read the writing on the wall, and wanted to make sure that which ever way the political winds blew, they would not become irrelevant. That is what smart business people do. Not hard to figure out, and requires zero tin foil.

        • Snowleopard says:

          The Rothschilds own most of Shell and others, the Rockefellers own most of Exxon-Mobil and others, Both families are major stockholders/directors of the largest banks and promoters/funders (if not initiators) of the warmist meme. The allegation that they would like a carbon trading scheme to increase their profits is not tin foil.

          I say if it looks like a duck and it flies like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it is reasonable to proceed as if it IS a duck until some lucky hunter shoots it and can PROVE it is a duck.

          BTW IIRC Gail has posted enough on the connections of the bankers and various corporations that one could prove this just from reading through those postings.

        • gator69 says:

          Those are rich people, not banks or bankers. I know it’s trendy to blame banks and bankers for the ruination of the world, but then so are tin foil caps these days.

          If you want to say that the super rich are lobbying and working to control investments, that would be correct, but smearing an entire industry because of a few individuals is like blaming gun crime on all gun owners. It is ludicrous.

        • Snowleopard says:

          Foremost among those “rich people’ just happen to be the families that invented modern banking, and that is why I refer to them as “the bankers”. Perhaps I should say the “banking cartel” instead?

          If so, this banking cartel owns / controls the FED, the IMF, the ECB and the BIS. Those institutions control most banking world wide and are using that control as an instrument to consolidate the power of those aforementioned “rich people”.

          Does that implicate my local credit union manager, bank loan officer, teller or you ? Of course not.

          Can we do without banks in modern society? Not easily, and I’m not suggesting that we try.

          It is true that any name i use to describe the elite fails to capture the true extent of their power. Suggestions are welcome.

        • gator69 says:

          What’s wrong with calling them by name? You sound like an drooling “Occupy Wallstreet” drummer when you attack the rich. Being rich is not a crime, it is something to which we should all aspire.

        • Gail Combs says:

          Actually Gator, it is Fractional Reserve Banking sucking up an unfair share of the GDP that is the problem.

          ~ Nelson W. Aldrich, United States Senator, at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 IV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914)) said:

          Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none is so effectual as that which deludes them with paper money. It is the most perfect expedient ever invented for fertilizing the rich man’s fields by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation, these bear lightly on the happiness of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. Our own history has recorded enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice and intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by Government.

          This was a cynical repeat of the speech of Sen. Daniel Webster, during the debate over the reauthorization of the Second National Bank of the U.S. in 1832. Aldrich the author of the original Federal Reserve Act was looking at it from the point of view of the rich man.

          A disordered currency is one of the greatest of evils. It wars against industry, frugality, and economy. And it fosters the evil spirits of extravagance and speculation. Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is one of the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation: These bear lightly the happiness of the mass of the community, compared with fraudulent currencies and robberies committed with depreciated paper.

          There was a very good reason the Constitution, Article 1 Section 10 said:

          No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

          Unfortunately the USA was under capitalized and forced to use bankers who relied on Fractional Reserve Banking and that opened the door.

          On a side note,I find it interesting that the FDA had the gall to actually claim in a court of law when answering FTCLDF (Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund): “There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract.” [p. 27].

          A mortgage or any loan is a Contract and there must be ‘Consideration’ on both sides. That is a thing of value. Banks are committing fraud by lending 3% or in the case of First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969) 0% REAL WEALTH — that is First National Bank of Montgomery in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis,“…did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry….”

          In the case of First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly, presiding Justice Martin Mahoney in his court memorandum stated: “Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.” and rejected the bank’s claim for foreclosure, and allowed the defendant kept his house.

          Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927:

          The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.”

          Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934:

          ” We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.

        • gator69 says:

          Well Gail, I am thankful I was defrauded by my bank who gave me a mortgage and made this little slice of Heaven possible. Silly me!

        • Snowleopard says:

          Perhaps this convo is futile. “Rich people” was your name for them, and that’s why it’s in quotes. I don’t use it normally for just the reason you point out.

          My dad raised eight kids on a Postal Worker’s salary, put those of us who wanted it through college, and still had accumulated several million in investments when he died. Unfortunately his method no longer works. Guess why.

          I do not see honestly acquired wealth as evil, but rather the drive for power and control by the aforementioned banker cartel group is evil. As a means to promote their power that group has promoted (among others) government debt, communism, fascism, socialism and radical Muslim theocracy.

          I also see preventing others from becoming wealthy as especially evil. Stealing assets from the former middle class until they are poor (Cyprus, Greece, etc) is even worse. What this group is doing amounts to dividing the world into feudal fiefdoms.

        • gator69 says:

          You dad’s method still works fine. A mail carrier today starts out making the equivalent of $72,000 per year on average. Plus the USPS retirement benefits far outweigh the private sector. The main difference today is the TV in every room, multiple computers and a more than one phone per person. Then there are the McMansions people are buying today, college educations even for the idiot children, and cars for each member of the family. Consunerism is what has stolen the wealth of the avearge modern American.

          Again, it is not hard to figure out.

        • Snowleopard says:

          Gail I do agree that the first crimes of the bankers were fractional reserve banking and fiat paper money. I just think those things are so well established that they cannot be reversed until they crash of their own weight.

        • gator69 says:

          Again with the “bankers”. I was a banker, and so was my grandfather who was probably the most ethical, honest and prncipled man I have ever met.

          Name names, and quit smearing an industry, it is childish and makes you look like a dirty hippie banging on a drum in Central Park.

        • Snowleopard says:

          “A mail carrier today starts out making the equivalent of $72,000 per year on average”

          .No. That would be a full time carrier at top of scale which takes about 15 years these days, unless you are computing the value of benefits and projected value of retirement as if it were salary. A typical USPS PR tactic at contract negotiation time, though never used when discussing management salary. Many postal employees now spend their whole career at part time now as USPS resists filling full time positions.

          ZIRP has also torpedoed a major component of accumulating wealth through savings. When other investments look risky there is no return on savings accounts or government bonds.
          As for fraction reserve banking, and fiat money, they are a component of all banking today so the use of “the bankers” is appropriate as all are complicit, except those few offering fractional gold deposits.

        • gator69 says:

          Average postal worker makes $72,000 a year

          That is average salary, before benefits, which are massive. And of course we are discussing fulltime employment, and not parttime. Apples to apples.

          So you deny consumerism? Interesting. And you deny markets. Even more interesting.

          “Banker” is anyone who works in the industry. I know, because I was a banker.

          Quit beating your drum.

        • Snowleopard says:

          “I am thankful I was defrauded by my bank who gave me a mortgage and made this little slice of Heaven possible. Silly me!”

          Of course you, having been a banker, would realize that real estate without mortgage availability would be priced at what those few with cash could bid. Thus your total purchase cost would be that price (not inflated price plus ~2x in interest, plus required insurance), and that price would likely be a fraction of what it has been bid up by mortgage availability.

        • gator69 says:

          And I also realize that if my aunt had a dick, she would be my uncle.

          Thanks for the word salad.

        • Snowleopard says:

          OK apples to apples.

          You said “A mail carrier today starts out making the equivalent of $72,000 per year on average”

          And Now you say: “Average postal worker makes $72,000 a year”

          The first statement is false. The second statement is true only if you consider all management as workers.

          I do not work for USPS, but i did for a time when i was younger. My extended family and friends include several active, former and retired Postmasters, managers, carriers, window clerks, and two division managers, so i have an inside view.

        • gator69 says:

          You said “A mail carrier today starts out making the equivalent of $72,000 per year on average”

          No, I said, “A mail carrier today starts out making the equivalent of $72,000 per year on average”. So my first stement is not false, as it includes benefits, and this includes parttime workers. The average salary for US workers is $43,000, so your dad would still do fine as long as he spent money in the same manner and not like consumers today.

          And I just got through researching this info two weeks ago.

    • gator69 says:

      Eric Holder has gone back to work for his old firm, the white-collar defense heavyweight Covington & Burling. The former attorney general decided against going for a judgeship, saying he’s not ready for the ivory tower yet. “I want to be a player,” he told the National Law Journal, one would have to say ominously.

      Holder will reassume his lucrative partnership (he made $2.5 million the last year he worked there) and take his seat in an office that reportedly – this is no joke – was kept empty for him in his absence…

      “Just because I’m at Covington doesn’t mean I will abandon the public interest work,” he told CNN. He added to the National Law Review that a big part of the reason he was going back to private practice was because he wanted to give back to the community.

      Yes, if you mean “giving back to the community” by making ten times what a supreme court justice makes.

      Holder is ready for the ebony tower.

      • MRW says:

        a big part of the reason he was going back to private practice was because he wanted to give back to the community

        That’s what he was supposed to do as Attorney General of the USA. Give back to the community by taking a pay cut, and a shave on partner profits.

  7. robert card says:

    The alarmists want to make a big deal out of Exxon researching global warming.
    Well, I hate to tell you but that is only good business. It behooves Exxon to know that if climate change is real and caused by Mann then we better know about it because we are going to be affected. It could mean big changes to their operations. It would not be prudent to ignore the implications of man-made climate change. It is not a bad thing as the Alarmists would have you believe but only good business.

    Too bad a few governments around the world did not take the time and money to look at the total climate picture rather than depend on the lying, cheating, biased alarmists. A little common sense could answer a lot of questions and send the alarmists packing. Better than wasting money trying to make the sun stop shining. Man has a big ego if he thinks he can sway Mother Nature. We may poison our world with chemical pollutant but CO2 is not a pollutant and does not cause warming.

  8. Gail Combs says:

    Seems the Queen has decide not to trust the UK power grid. She has installed private generators to supply Windsor Castle from the Thames flow.

    The Royals are invested in Shell and BP BTW.

    • gator69 says:

      Millions of Americans are invested in Shell and BP through their retirement plans. Owning oil stocks is common, and smart. Money is not evil, and neither is investing wisely.

Leave a Reply