ExxonMobil spent ~ $25 million since 1998 to fund climate denier groups

They promised they would stop doing this in 2007. They haven't stopped at all, though: last year they gave 1.5 million dollars to climate denier groups - funding much of the still ongoing Climategate frenzy (yes all scientists and scientific organisations have since been cleared by a number of independent investigations) ...which erupted so conveniently right before the climate talks in Copenhagen that the process was utterly derailed and ended in failure.

No wonder the public is confused about climate change, there has been a sustained, well funded campaign of deliberate disinformation poured over their heads. And on the other side, underfunded, under siege climate scientists (who by definition are not very good at PR and campaigning). It's an uneven fight, it's an unfair fight. And the victims are us, the planet and all that lives on it. All for higher profits for a select few.

I get so mad that this is allowed at all - this has nothing to do with free speech. If you yell fire in a packed movie house and people die as they get trampled in the rush, that's going to get you before a judge. Why is this different? Because the time scale is larger and most of the dead are in countries far away, where they are poor and without influence?

I think ExxonMobil's behaviour is criminal. If a corporation is a person in the eyes of the law, perhaps it's time they were treated as one.


Found this on desmogblog, the Times article is subscription only.

One last comment on Climategate

Yes I know, I said i was done with Climategate but I just want to link to this article: Climategate: the missing context because yes, I would like to see a journalist do the research, and dammit, publish the expose.

I want to know who was behind this, and why.
And I want to see them strung up on a high tree with killer ants covering their honey coated bodies.

How dare they play these games with our commons. How dare they.

Professor Michael Mann cleared of all scientific misconduct.

Again.

Let this be an end to the matter.
If people persist in howling misconduct, I would let them and treat them with the scorn you'd heap on the head of an ignorant fool, laugh at them, ignore them, anything but engage them.

It's been enough. Respect for another's opinions is a fine thing, but the paranoid are never convinced.


As for the CRU hack, I hope next time I run into it, it's a movie with a damn good script.

Let this be the final word on the CRU stolen email drama

A distinguished panel of independent scientists has given a resounding vote of confidence in the credibility and integrity of the key studies into climate change that have emerged over the past 20 years from the embattled Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia.

The panel, chaired by Lord Oxburgh, a geologist and former rector of Imperial College London, was asked to review the scientific papers and methodology of the CRU following the theft of university emails, the leaking of which suggested a possible conspiracy to subvert data in order to support the case for man-made climate change.

Lord Oxburgh's investigation found no evidence to suggest that the CRU scientists had acted improperly or dishonestly. It found the unit's overall conclusions were sound but it criticised the CRU for not using the best statistical tools to analyse the data - although this misjudgement did not alter the overall results and conclusions.

and:

"We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the CRU and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we could have detected it. Rather we found a small group of dedicated if slightly disorganised researchers who were ill-prepared for being the focus of public attention."

source


Word!
I really hope Professor Phil Jones will be back at work tomorrow and if not then, soon!

CRU hacked mails - Jones steps down (temporarily)

I don't think he should.

This really is a storm about nothing and it's whipped up to grand proportions by those who would want Copenhagen to fail. He should not be paying the price for being the messenger of bad news. Climate scientists have been up against a concerted attack over the past years that has ever increased in ferocity. Against such sustained wilful misinformation, what do you do... how do you cope, how do you keep your message clear? I think climate scientists on the whole did an admirable job so far and none of them should not be intimidated into stepping down at this point.

Not accepting the reality of the science is wishful thinking, head in sand policy. People would rather it were not so and are in denial. This is partly why there is such a receptive audience for what clearly is a lot of hot air.

Does it matter in the end? Some say yes, but I believe it's past the point where we still can make the changes that would turn things around for us as a species. Hansen may still hope, still want to fight, but I think it's pretty useless.

Not that I'm going on a carbon binge now, understand, and I'll keep trying to spread the message, make people understand what we are facing. This is reflexive by now, I've been at it since the Club of Rome days. But, I am pretty sure I'm pissing agin' the wind here.

For those who want to understand what's going on, what's just so much dramatic b/s and what's a serious issue, I'm directing you here.