$1B Climate Change Denial Industry: Getting Rich Telling Lies, Destroying Humanity...

P

PoliTalker

Diversity Makes Greatness
"The overwhelming majority of climate scientists, international governmental bodies, relevant research institutes and scientific societies are in unison in saying that climate change is real, that it’s a problem, and that we should probably do something about it now, not later. And yet, for some reason, the idea persists in some peoples’ minds that climate change is up for debate, or that climate change is no big deal.

Actually, it’s not “for some reason” that people are confused. There’s a very obvious reason. There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. In a new and incredibly thorough study, Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle took a deep dive into the financial structure of the climate deniers, to see who is holding the purse strings.

According to Brulle’s research, the 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues."

The Billion Dollar Climate Change Denial Industry

PoliTalker anti-troll thread thief disclaimer: If this thread is stolen, plagiarized, will the thief have the nerve to use the entire OP, word for word? Including this disclaimer? If you want my take on it, you'll have to post to this original PoliTalker thread. I refuse to be an enabler for online bullies, so I won't post to a stolen thread. I won't even read it. If you don't see me, PoliTalker, posting in this thread check the author. This might be a hijacked thread, not the original.
 
PoliTalker said:
"The overwhelming majority of climate scientists, international governmental bodies, relevant research institutes and scientific societies are in unison in saying that climate change is real, that it’s a problem, and that we should probably do something about it now, not later. And yet, for some reason, the idea persists in some peoples’ minds that climate change is up for debate, or that climate change is no big deal.

Actually, it’s not “for some reason” that people are confused. There’s a very obvious reason. There is a very well-funded, well-orchestrated climate change-denial movement, one funded by powerful people with very deep pockets. In a new and incredibly thorough study, Drexel University sociologist Robert Brulle took a deep dive into the financial structure of the climate deniers, to see who is holding the purse strings.

According to Brulle’s research, the 91 think tanks and advocacy organizations and trade associations that make up the American climate denial industry pull down just shy of a billion dollars each year, money used to lobby or sway public opinion on climate change and other issues."

The Billion Dollar Climate Change Denial Industry

PoliTalker anti-troll thread thief disclaimer: If this thread is stolen, plagiarized, will the thief have the nerve to use the entire OP, word for word? Including this disclaimer? If you want my take on it, you'll have to post to this original PoliTalker thread. I refuse to be an enabler for online bullies, so I won't post to a stolen thread. I won't even read it. If you don't see me, PoliTalker, posting in this thread check the author. This might be a hijacked thread, not the original.
Click to expand...

Even Trump's own EPA administrator - aka, the guy that Trump thought was the best in the nation to manage our environmental problems - testified to congress that human-induced climate change is a real problem that needs to be addressed in the long term, although he did not think it was one of our most pressing and top priorities right now.

That is pretty much a stunning admission that decades of global warming denial was a complete hoax.

I think your post in insightful, because I have never thought climate denial really had anything to do with science or with sound environmental management.

For one thing, a lot of people have become famous or rich from the Climate Change Denial Industry. People who otherwise do not have the talent or wherewithal to become rich and famous.

Secondly, there are trillions of barrels of untapped oil still in the ground which has not yet been burned. The oligarchy is not going to walk away from that kind of money without a fight to the death.

Lastly, there is some element of emotional investment in climate denial. Teabaggers have been pre-conditioned emotionally to reject everything that is perceived to be liberal. One single example - Trump violating, and pulling of of the Iran nuclear agreement, an international agreement that was actually working, but Trump wanted out of it simply because Obama negotiated it.

There are Climate Deniers who have emotionally invested themselves in denial for decades. And I put the probability at exactly zero percent that, at this point, they are every going to confess that they were wrong. I believe some of them would rather see harm come to their children and grandchildren than admit they were wrong to anonymous liberals they will never meet on an obscure message board.
 
Hello Cypress,

Cypress said:
Even Trump's own EPA administrator - aka, the guy that Trump thought was the best in the nation to manage our environmental problems - testified to congress that human-induced climate change is a real problem that needs to be addressed in the long term, although he did not think it was one of our most pressing and top priorities right now.

That is pretty much a stunning admission that decades of global warming denial was a complete hoax.

I think your post in insightful, because I have never thought climate denial really had anything to do with science or with sound environmental management.

For one thing, a lot of people have become famous or rich from the Climate Change Denial Industry. People who otherwise do not have the talent or wherewithal to become rich and famous.

Secondly, there are trillions of barrels of untapped oil still in the ground which has not yet been burned. The oligarchy is not going to walk away from that kind of money without a fight to the death.

Lastly, there is some element of emotional investment in climate denial. Teabaggers have been pre-conditioned emotionally to reject everything that is perceived to be liberal. One single example - Trump violating, and pulling of of the Iran nuclear agreement, an international agreement that was actually working, but Trump wanted out of it simply because Obama negotiated it.

There are Climate Deniers who have emotionally invested themselves in denial for decades. And I put the probability at exactly zero percent that, at this point, they are every going to confess that they were wrong. I believe some of them would rather see harm come to their children and grandchildren than admit they were wrong to anonymous liberals they will never meet on an obscure message board.
Click to expand...

I think you are totally correct on all counts.

Seething hatred as a way of life.

They give one another a group to identify with.

The old we/they theory.

We're not fighting the Germans, the Japanese, or the Rooskies anymore.

Now they absurdly believe they can remake America in their own vision.

Somehow, they believe they can either a) change the minds of all the liberals, or b) drive them away?

Neither is possible.

So they are stuck in a country with diversity of views.

But they don't want to admit it.

So, against all hope, they press on.

Talk about mixed up!

Why can't people just accept that we Americans are free to believe as we wish?

Why can't they accept reality?

Why can't they have some respect for Americans just doing the American thing and standing up for what they believe in?

Why do they have to be so obtuse, always resorting to whataboutism, deny, deflect, attack?

Why can't they argue their positions on the basis of merit?

Well, we know the answer to that one.

They would lose the argument!
 
Last edited:
I love the way Chevron and Exxon etc put up these "we care about the environment" ads on TV.........some nice looking woman in a hard hat feeding a squirrel or some shit like that
 
reagansghost said:
I love the way Chevron and Exxon etc put up these "we care about the environment" ads on TV.........some nice looking woman in a hard hat feeding a squirrel or some shit like that
Click to expand...

Talking out of both sides of the mouth has been redefined by these outfits.
 
reagansghost said:
I love the way Chevron and Exxon etc put up these "we care about the environment" ads on TV.........some nice looking woman in a hard hat feeding a squirrel or some shit like that
Click to expand...
I'd rather see them showing Formula 1 cars in action.
I've been to one of those races. Very impressive!
 
reagansghost said:
I should have mentioned BP, they hire the best advertising firms in the galaxy by far
Click to expand...

What brand of petrol do you recommend as an alternative to BP, Chevron or Exxon? I want to be environmentally conscious.
I've already queried McSlawber about this, he refused to answer
 
"According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.”"

**************************

Follow the (Climate Change) Money
Dec 18th, 2018 3 min read


The first iron rule of American politics is: Follow the money. This explains, oh, about 80 percent of what goes on in Washington.

Shortly after the latest Chicken Little climate change report was published last month, I noted on CNN that one reason so many hundreds of scientists are persuaded that the sky is falling is that they are paid handsomely to do so.

I noted that “In America and around the globe governments have created a multi-billion dollar Climate Change Industrial Complex.” And then I added: “A lot of people are getting really, really rich off of the climate change industry.” According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.”

This doesn’t mean that the planet isn’t warming. But the tidal wave of funding does reveal a powerful financial motive for scientists to conclude that the apocalypse is upon us. No one hires a fireman if there are no fires. No one hires a climate scientist (there are thousands of them now) if there is no catastrophic change in the weather. Why doesn’t anyone in the media ever mention this?

But when I lifted this hood, it incited more hate mail than from anything I’ve said on TV or written. Could it be that this rhetorical missile hit way too close to home?

How dare I impugn the integrity of scientists and left-wing think-tanks by suggesting that their research findings are perverted by hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer handouts. The irony of this indignation is that any academic whose research dares question the “settled science” of the climate change complex is instantly accused of being a shill for the oil and gas industry or the Koch brothers.

Apparently, if you take money from the private sector to fund research, your work is inherently biased, but if you get multimillion-dollar grants from Uncle Sam, you are as pure as the freshly fallen snow.

How big is the Climate Change Industrial Complex today? Surprisingly, no one seems to be keeping track of all the channels of funding. A few years ago Forbes magazine went through the federal budget and estimated about $150 billion in spending on climate change and green energy subsidies during President Obama’s first term.

That didn’t include the tax subsidies that provide a 30 percent tax credit for wind and solar power — so add to those numbers about $8 billion to $10 billion a year. Then add billions more in costs attributable to the 29 states with renewable energy mandates that require utilities to buy expensive “green” energy.

Worldwide the numbers are gargantuan. Five years ago, a leftist group called the Climate Policy Initiative issued a study which found that “Global investment in climate change” reached $359 billion that year. Then to give you a sense of how money-hungry these planet-saviors are, the CPI moaned that this spending “falls far short of what’s needed” a number estimated at $5 trillion.

For $5 trillion we could feed everyone on the planet, end malaria, and provide clean water and reliable electricity to every remote village in Africa. And we would probably have enough money left over to find a cure for cancer and Alzheimer's.

The entire Apollo project to put a man on the moon cost less than $200 billion. We are spending twice that much every year on climate change.

This tsunami of government money distorts science in hidden ways that even the scientists who are corrupted often don’t appreciate. If you are a young eager-beaver researcher who decides to devote your life to the study of global warming, you’re probably not going to do your career any good or get famous by publishing research that the crisis isn’t happening.

But if you’ve built bogus models that predict the crisis is getting worse by the day, then step right up and get a multi-million dollar grant.

Now here’s the real scandal of the near trillion dollars that governments have stolen from taxpayers to fund climate change hysteria and research. By the industry’s own admission there has been almost no progress worldwide in actually combating climate change. The latest reports by the U.S. government and the United Nations say the problem is getting worse not better and we have not delayed the apocalypse by a single day.

Has there ever been such a massive government expenditure that has had such minuscule returns on investment? After three decades of “research” the only “solution” is for the world to stop using fossil fuels, which is like saying that we should stop growing food.

Really? The greatest minds of the world entrusted with hundreds of billions of dollars can only come up with a solution that would entail the largest government power grab in world history, shutting down industrial production (just look at the catastrophe in Germany when they went all in for green energy), and throwing perhaps billions of human beings into poverty? If that’s the remedy, I will take my chances on a warming planet.

President Trump should tell these “scientists” that “you’re fired.” And we taxpayers should demand our money back.
https://www.heritage.org/environment/commentary/follow-the-climate-change-money
 
The untold other parallel story to this is the age of the 6th major extinction, the Anthropogenic Extinction Event.

Now showing on a planet under you.

And a first.

This is the first time a mass extinction has been caused by one species.

It's gonna be a very different world without elephants or bees.

Sad to see corral go, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top