Much ado about nothing.

4 thoughts on “Much ado about nothing.”

  1. Ove, I would like to find out more about the ” well organised and well funded denialist movement”. Do you think you could point out any sceptic who has the kind of high-powered funding that has flowed to Jones’s group at East Anglia, or to Mann’s group at Penn State? Do you have any citations that I could look up?

    I’m not saying that you’re wrong, but merely that the evidence of the funding has escaped my attention so far, while Mann and Jones seem to be rolling in money.


  2. Hi Anson – Just a thought here: 1) Mann & Jones aren’t ‘rolling in money’ per se – it’s research funding, not personal salaries. Being a scientist really isn’t that profitable! Unlike, say, being a sceptic like Lord Monckton, who was given a $20,000 stipend for his fortnight in Australia. The research groups of Mann & Jones work hard for research funding, whereas sceptic’s like Monckton rely on highly questionable interpretations of other people’s research, and pseudoscience from people like Plimer. 2) It’s misleading to compare the two groups in terms of funding sources – Mann & Jones use research funding (and alot of it) for science, whereas sceptic groups (oh, Heartland Institute, CO2 Science, you name it) have no overheads, as they don’t do any primary research or indeed any science at all. It doesn’t take much co-ordination, effort or indeed funding to coordinate and lodge multiple FOI requests in an attempt to derail a scientific research group (it requires less money and is much easier to tear down a house than to build it). As for sceptic funding, hit Sourcewatch.


  3. Hi Anson … one of the estimates is that denialists received $450 million in 2008 from fossil fuel interests to fuel their activities. In a recent article (which I may post in full), ExxonMobil was identified as a key player, having “donated hundreds of thousands of dollars in the past few years to climate change sceptics. The Atlas Foundation, created by the late Sir Anthony Fisher (founder of the Institute of Economic Affairs), received more than $100,000 in 2008 from ExxonMobil, according to the oil company’s reports.” Other sources have pointed out that Ian PLimer has received over $3 million shares from mining interests in Australia, a little compromising if he is trying to shop the idea that he is an independent voice!


  4. Thanks, Ove.
    I was glad to see your more recent report of Greenpeace’s analysis of Koch Industries expenditures. That’s a lot of money.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s