#Fakegate…comedy and entertainment

Keep reading  → (Jonova)

While I was away for ten days, the warmist brigade published some documents, the main one turning out to be FAKE!

Surprise, surprise, they have lost the warming science debate so continue with smears and innuendo…and will soon have a ‘knock on the door’ from the lawyers. Fun, fun, fun. They cannot help themselves, so they provide us with a huge opportunity for comedy and entertainment.

The warmist shills are making a big song and dance about The Heartland Institute and their massive funding of around $6million dollars spent on the climate debate, even including a few thousand that the Koch Brothers donated to spend on Health Care!

This is extremely good value in winning the science debate, having been outspent by Obama, Brown (UK), Juliar Gillard as well as Gore and Company by at least 100/1…or is it 1000/1.

Jonova: “Instead the hyped non-denier-gate shows just how incredibly successful the Heartland Institute is. Look at the numbers. The skeptics have managed to turn the propaganda around against a tide of money, and it is really some achievement.

 Entity USD
Greenpeace  $300m  2010 Annual Report
WWF  $700m  ”  ($524m Euro)
Pew Charitable Trust  $360m 2010 Annual Report
Sierra Club  $56m 2010 Annual Report
NSW climate change fund (just one random govt example)  $750m  NSW Gov (A$700m)
UK university climate fund (just another random govt example) $360m UK Gov (£234 m)
Heartland Institute $6.4m
US government funding for climate science and technology  $7,000m  “Climate Money” 2009
US government funding for “climate related appropriations” $1,300m USAID 2010
Annual turnover in global carbon markets $120,000m
2010 Point Carbon
Annual investment in renewable energy $243,000m
2010  BNEF
US government funding for skeptical scientists $ 0

These are annual turnovers or annual budgets

So what the expose shows is that the Heartland Institute punches far above its weight with an incredibly efficient budget. “

Comments on all the links are a hoot…

About Tom Harley

Amateur ecologist and horticulturalist and CEO of Kimberley Environmental Horticulture Inc.
This entry was posted in Climate, comedy, science, weather and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to #Fakegate…comedy and entertainment

  1. Lost the debate? You have got to be kidding. The science is stronger than ever – you simply need to become familiar with the literature. As with any science. Deniers are really looking quite pathetic (as well as anti-Australian, reckless and morally questionable)

    • Tom Harley says:

      I obviously read far more than science than you. Just go back through my archives and start reading, I know you wont, because it will take you years, as it has me. If you are doing science, you wont have time to read. For a start, there is a site that has peer reviewed papers from over 1000 scientists that all add up to the falsification of your hypothesis. It’s easy to find, just google it or search it here.
      I could also go on and use name-calling like you have here, but that is not what I do. I just shake my head and laugh at the knots admitted fraudsters like Gleick get themselves into.

      • Tom Harley says:

        Maybe good Dr., rather than call me names like “denier”, show me what science actually proves that increases in CO2 are causing temperatures to rise, especially over the last 15 years while temperatures are declining. I am all ears and eyes. You cant? Not a scientist then?

    • Tom Harley says:

      So Dr Davidson, which of these describes you?
      George and Wilcox, in their book “American Extremists”, list twenty-two common traits of extremists. The traits are:

      (1) character assassination; (2) name calling and labeling; (3) irresponsible sweeping generalizations; (4) inadequate proof for assertions; (5) advocacy of double standards; (6) tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil; (7) Manichean worldview; (8) advocacy of some degree of censorship or repression of opponents and/or critics; (9) a tendency to identify themselves in terms of who their enemies are: whom they hate and who hates them; (10) tendency toward argument by intimidation; (11) use of slogans, buzzwords, and thought stopping clichés; (12) assumption of moral or other superiority over others [like Dr. Gleick self-identification as an “ethicist”]; (13) doomsday thinking; (14) a belief that doing bad things in the service of a “good” cause is permissible; (15) emphasis on emotional responses, and, correspondingly, less importance to reasoning and logical analysis; (16) hypersensitivity and vigilance; (17) use of supernatural rationale for beliefs and actions; (18) problems tolerating ambiguity and uncertainty; (19) inclination toward “groupthink’; (20) tendency to personalize hostility; (21) a feeling that the “system” is no good unless they win; and (22) tendency to believe in far-reaching conspiracy theories.

      The recent behavior of Dr. Gleick along with many of his online apologists would seem to meet nearly all of these criteria. Is it time for civil society to become alarmed by the rise of global warming extremism?

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s