Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IPCC: Resistance is futile
watts up with that? ^ | September 26, 2011 | Anthony Watts

Posted on 09/27/2011 9:58:44 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Donna Laframboise has an excellent piece on how the IPCC has been assimilated by influence from the WWF.

Apparently hawking the threat of dead panda bears is quite lucrative, Donna writes:

It is important to understand that while the WWF might once have been a humble, shoestring operation this is no longer the case. It has grown into a business entity with offices in 30 countries that employs a staff of 5,000 (see the last page of this PDF). The US branch of the WWF alone employs:

That same branch also includes a:

In 2010, the WWF’s US arm had operating revenues of $224 million – just under a quarter of a billion dollars. Yes, that’s a B.

By way of comparison, operating revenues for Amnesty International’s US affiliate amounted to $36 million – one-sixth that amount (see page 29 here).

According to its 2010 annual report, the WWF’s international network had operating revenues of €524,963,000. Converted to US dollars that’s just shy of three-quarters of a billion. In one year.

Read it here. Well worth a read.
=============================================

That thing is a fiscal monster.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Conspiracy; Science; Weather
KEYWORDS: agw; algore; climatechange; climategate; communism; corruption; democrats; envirofascism; environmentalism; fascism; fraud; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; greenfraud; ipcc; junkscience; liberalfascism; obama; obamasminions; thegreenlie; wwf

1 posted on 09/27/2011 9:58:52 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; landsbaum; Signalman; NormsRevenge; steelyourfaith; Lancey Howard; ...

fyi


2 posted on 09/27/2011 9:59:46 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
For those not willing to follow links (Malware fears):

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


How the WWF Infiltrated the IPCC – Part 1

September 23, 2011

What is the WWF?
In the United States and Canada the initials WWF stand for the World Wildlife Fund. Elsewhere, this organization calls itself the World Wide Fund for Nature.

The WWF is an activist lobby group. On its website one finds declarations such as:

It is nearly impossible to overstate the threat of climate change. [see here, backup link here]

WWF’s vision of an eco-friendly future includes an entirely new layer of regulation, bureaucracy, and international law. Or, as the WWF phrases it:

a global legal framework…to ensure that governments can verify each other’s actions. [see here, backup link here]

Members of the voting public have never been asked if they want to pay for this new layer of bureaucracy, if they want to live under its restrictions, or if they think it’s even a good idea. The WWF you see, knows what’s best for all of us.

It is important to understand that while the WWF might once have been a humble, shoestring operation this is no longer the case. It has grown into a business entity with offices in 30 countries that employs a staff of 5,000 (see the last page of this PDF). The US branch of the WWF alone employs:

  • a Managing Director of International Finance
  • a Vice President of Business and Industry
  • a Senior Vice President of Market Transformation and
  • a Government Relations Program manager

That same branch also includes a:

  • a Director of International Climate Policy
  • a Managing Director of Climate Change
  • a Managing Director of Climate Adaptation
  • a Director of Climate Change Communications
  • a Senior Scientist, Climate Adaptation and
  • a lead specialist on Climate Change

In 2010, the WWF’s US arm had operating revenues of $224 million – just under a quarter of a billion dollars. Yes, that’s a B.

By way of comparison, operating revenues for Amnesty International’s US affiliate amounted to $36 million – one-sixth that amount (see page 29 here).

According to its 2010 annual report, the WWF’s international network had operating revenues of €524,963,000. Converted to US dollars that’s just shy of three-quarters of a billion. In one year.

When hiring someone new to lead its global climate initiative recently the WWF did what hedge funds and the International Monetary Fund do when seeking high-powered personnel – it took out a half-page advertisement in The Economist magazine.

In other words, the WWF is an obscenely wealthy organization. And money, as they say, talks. When one is in the lobbying business and cash is abundant, one treats one’s friends very well, indeed. Nice meals, nice hotel rooms, trips to exotic locales – and heaven only knows what else.

Which brings me to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The Recruitment Drive
In late 2004, around the time that work was beginning on what would become the IPCC’s landmark 2007 report, the WWF launched a recruitment drive. It established a parallel body – the Climate Witness Scientific Advisory Panel – and then systematically targeted IPCC-affiliated scientists.

It’s not clear what the courtship process involved, precisely – or who joined in what year or in what order – but by late 2008 the WWF says it had recruited 130

leading climate scientists mostly, but not exclusively, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change… [see p. 2 of this PDF]

An eight-page document prepared in 2008 advised scientists whom the WWF was still wooing that there were “opportunities for further involvement in a number of other WWF activities” including “attendance at conferences, forums or workshops and interaction with the media.” Moreover, “future collaboration between WWF and research institutions” was a possibility.

It is difficult to believe that any self-respecting scientist would have anything to do with the Climate Witness Panel after reading those eight pages. The WWF states baldly, right up front, that the purpose of the panel is to heighten the public’s sense of urgency. That particular phrase is used four times on the final page.

In remarkably candid fashion the WWF says it wants to

inspire stronger action on climate change in the community. We aim to build a movement of individuals…who want to be active in addressing this threat.

No one, therefore, lied to these “leading climate scientists.” No one soft-peddled what was really going on. The WWF explicitly told them it wanted their help in frightening the public so that the WWF could build a movement.

Scientists who join the WWF’s panel are required to complete a form that indicates their willingness to evaluate testimonials the WWF collects from ordinary people who believe that they themselves have detected human-caused climate change.

The glorified public-opinion-poll the WWF uses to assemble these testimonials may be seen here. Declaring it an embarrassing, unscientific load of rubbish is putting it mildly.

People are asked if they have personally observed changes in rainfall, snowfall, sea water temperature, and ocean currents. But sensible inquiries – such as Have you kept a lengthy, careful, written record? - are nowhere to be found.

The WWF invites these people to assign “consequences” to the changes they believe they’ve personally witnessed. It poses all sorts of questions the average woman-on-the-street or grandma in a rural Third World village would hardly be in a position to answer reliably. Have there been changes in marine biodiversity? How about species distribution and migration?

Next the WWF invites its respondents to tick off which human health consequences they think are directly linked to the climate changes they believe they have witnessed. Has malaria increased? How about water-borne diseases? And here’s my personal favourite – has there been a change in ultraviolet radiation?

The WWF explains to the scientists it’s trying to recruit that the only thing they need do is “peer-review” these testimonials

for levels of consistency with current scientific knowledge of climate change impacts…The primary function of a [Scientific Advisory Panel] member is to verify the scientific basis of the Climate Witness stories WWF collects from around the world to ensure they are consistent with peer-reviewed literature about climate change impacts already happening today in a particular region.

The public fills out five pages of questions, but the scientists are informed they’ll be asked to evaluate

one-page ‘Climate Witness stories’ submitted to us by members of the public.

In other words, the data the scientists receive will first have been packaged by activists. This fact, on its own, invalidates the entire exercise.

The WWF advises these scientists that, for their trouble, they’ll receive a handsome reward:

Participation in the Climate Witness Programme is voluntary and in return we acknowledge your contribution on our global website as well as featuring your name below every Climate Witness stories [sic] you review.

So why can’t people who are smart enough to earn a PhD figure out that this is a spectacularly bad deal? Work for us for free and, in exchange we’ll take your pristine scientific reputation and link it to our scientifically bankrupt campaign to frighten and manipulate the public.

We’ll do you the great service of advertising, on our global website, that no one should ever again mistake you for someone with sound judgment. We’ll use our multi-million-dollar budget to announce to the world that you must either be a political hack or an unsophisticated rube.

Ah, but perhaps I’m not being entirely fair. There’s one more line to that paragraph. It reads:

WWF is also seeking opportunities to promote new climate change research so please feel free to contact the Climate Witness Manager for more information.

to be continued…       read Part 2 here

.

Sidebar One
While the WWF is shockingly cavalier about tarnishing the reputation of the scientists it recruits it is nevertheless keenly aware of the need to carefully manage its own image.

The 8-page recruitment document aimed at scientists includes a section that reads:

We ask that you seek prior consent from your…Liaison person if you wish to use the WWF or Climate Witness Programme logo or names, or make a reference to your participation in the Climate Witness Programme. [see p. 6]

How’s that for chutzpah?

.

Sidebar Two
On page one, the Climate Witness Interview Form asks members of the public two questions that give them enormous incentive to exaggerate their observations. First they are asked:

Are you prepared to travel to your capital for Climate Witness event if the costs were reimbursed? [sic]

Translation: How would you like a free trip to somewhere you might never get to visit otherwise?

Shamelessly, the WWF then ups the ante:

Are you prepared to travel internationally for a Climate Witness event if the costs were reimbursed?

.

read Part 2 here


3 posted on 09/27/2011 10:03:18 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

How the WWF Infiltrated the IPCC – Part 2

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

September 26, 2011

Between 2004 and 2008 the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) persuaded 130 scientists to join its Climate Witness Scientific Advisory Panel. As I explained in Part 1, the Climate Witness campaign has an overtly political purpose. The WWF openly admits it’s trying to increase the public’s sense of urgency about climate change. Fear, alarm, anxiety – that’s what they’re pushing.

The campaign involves collecting testimonials from ordinary people who believe they are witnessing the dire effects of climate change in their own backyards. In an attempt to imbue these beliefs with an aura of scientific respectability, scientists on the WWF advisory panel examine these 1-page testimonials and decide if they are consistent with published research.

When it comes to the big picture the WWF harbours no doubt or uncertainty. It says it is “nearly impossible to overstate the threat of climate change” (see here, backup link here).

The IPCC, however, is supposed to be a neutral, objective scientific body. A judge presiding over a murder trial cannot party with the prosecution team during the evening. Similarly, IPCC personnel who are entrusted with the job of determining whether or not humanity is responsible for climate change should remain aloof from the lynch mob outside the jailhouse door.

In a 2008 document, the WWF said its panel of 130 “leading climate scientists” were “mostly, but not exclusively, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” These particular scientists, therefore, are more than merely sympathetic to the WWF’s point-of-view. They have a formalized relationship with that organization. They were wooed, they were won over, and then they stepped inside the WWF tent.

What does this mean for the celebrated 2007 IPCC report – the one that secured the IPCC its Nobel Peace Prize? Let me give you a quick snapshot:

It means that nearly two-thirds of the 2007 Climate Bible’s chapters – 28 out of 44 (which works out to 64%) – have at least one individual on their roster who is affiliated with the WWF.

It means that WWF-affiliated scientists helped write every last chapter in Working Group 2 – all 20 of them.

It means that 15 chapters in the 2007 Climate Bible were led by WWF-affiliated scientists – their coordinating lead authors are members of the WWF’s panel. In three cases, chapters were led by two WWF-affiliated coordinating lead authors. In one instance eight personnel in a single chapter have WWF links. In another there are six.

It means, ladies and gentlemen, that the IPCC has been infiltrated. It has been wholly and entirely compromised.

.

I’ve spent untold hours completing all the searching, cross-checking, and tabulating that led to these findings. In the coming days I’ll take each of the above statements in turn and back them up with clear, incontrovertible evidence. As usual, I’ll link directly to my source material so that anyone can readily verify my claims.

Stayed tuned. This is going to be a wild ride.

.

4 posted on 09/27/2011 10:05:19 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All

94 Responses to IPCC: Resistance is futile

*****************************EXCERPT**********************************************

ZT says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:01 am

I think that Daniel H, ex-WWF employee summed the situation up well a while back in comments on this site:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/24/the-scandal-deepens-ipcc-ar4-riddled-with-non-peer-reviewed-wwf-papers/#comment-298859

Might be interesting for Donna to interview Daniel H….


5 posted on 09/27/2011 10:10:09 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

***************************************EXCERPT****************************************

Leon Brozyna says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:02 am

Apparently, being a charitable tax-exempt non-profit is quite profitable.

6 posted on 09/27/2011 10:11:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

**************************************EXCERPT**************************************

Brent Hargreaves says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:15 am

Good grief! $224 billion! How on earth does a charity created by well-meaning amateurs grow to become such a behemoth?! Where does that mountain – wrong metaphor – that tsunami of loot come from? And with such financial clout comes real power. This is Orwellian.

7 posted on 09/27/2011 10:13:26 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

************************************EXCERPT*****************************************

Gail Combs says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:18 am

“…The U.S. WWF is a superpower in the international non-profit arena, with 20% of its revenue from government tax money… $24,589,994 in 2001. “

http://www.undueinfluence.com/wwf.htm

Isn’t it nice to know you are donating money to WWF whether you want to or not???


8 posted on 09/27/2011 10:15:01 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
Relating to post #5:

******************************************EXCERPT**************************************

Crispin in Waterloo says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:27 am

Daniel mentions Jennifer Morgan, an ex-WWF acolyte [Noun 1. acolyte - someone who assists a priest or minister in a liturgical service] dedicated to ‘a carbon-free future’. As biomass (food) is 50% carbon this will be an interesting achievement.

“She is a Review Editor for Chapter 13 on “International Cooperation: Agreements and Instruments” for the 5th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). ”
http://www.wri.org/profile/jennifer-morgan

Daniel’s description of the database WWF has of companies who, if they contribute enough, will not be targeted by a media campaign vilifying them, is chilling. It is reminscent of the actions of governments described by John Perkins in, “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” and its sequel.


9 posted on 09/27/2011 10:17:46 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior
A classic!


10 posted on 09/27/2011 10:17:50 AM PDT by GSWarrior (To activate this tagline please contact the Admin Moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

11 posted on 09/27/2011 10:20:26 AM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (Perry's idea of border control: Use both hands to welcome the illegals right in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; golux; proud_yank; Bockscar; grey_whiskers; WL-law; IrishCatholic; ...
Thanx for the ping Ernest_at_the_Beach !

 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

12 posted on 09/27/2011 10:21:03 AM PDT by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior
LOL!

Thanks!

13 posted on 09/27/2011 10:23:20 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: perfect_rovian_storm

Whew. Just got in ahead of you. ; )


14 posted on 09/27/2011 10:26:05 AM PDT by GSWarrior (To activate this tagline please contact the Admin Moderator.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

***************************************EXCERPT*********************************************

Mike Bromley the Canucklehead says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:55 am

Donna is marvellously adept at finding the inconsistencies in the IPCC juggernaut. The WWF is a frightening expose. Of the ‘environmentalists’ I’ve met in my travels, all seem to possess this penchant for uber-moralistic fanatacism, even if they are merely armchair-variety world-savers. What causes this nasty characteristic? Mixed in with this type of thing is a ‘healthy’ dose of conspiracy-theorizing and socialist doctrine disseminated by means of ‘shoulds’ and ‘oughts’, with apparently no consideration of the economic or social impact. Bloody hell. Democracy is nice, but using its facade to energize these charades means the end of freedom.

15 posted on 09/27/2011 10:27:20 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
See the WWF Logo at WUWT website....

More:

**********************************EXCERPT**************************************************

Betapug says:

September 26, 2011 at 9:57 am

Anthony, I hope you have complied with the full current terms for use of the WWF logo. 15 pages of practice are here: http://www.climatetrackers.net/press/files/1198.pdf I do not think Naomi “NO LOGO” Klein will be on your side.

For the full flavour of WWF power and sophistication, it is worth Googling “WWF branding” and browsing some of the results such as: http://www.panda.org/standards/5_2_communications_strategy/

A favourite quote:

“Examples of why your target audience might be willing to act
Governments could be willing to change policy or regulations based on your project results because:
……
• It makes them look good on international level

Donors might support conservation strategies your project has found useful because:
• They hold potential for other areas
• The results gained are high, relative to the investment needed
• There is a need to test them in other settings “


16 posted on 09/27/2011 10:30:28 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

**********************************EXCERPT*****************************************

3x2 says:

September 26, 2011 at 10:00 am

As Carbon has been conflated with just about everything then the title “Director of International Climate Policy” pretty much covers anything one can link to CO2. As we have seen, one can link CO2 to just about anything. That many of these organisations still operate as charities while pushing an agenda that bites into every area of life is a disgrace. “Saving Polar Bears” is one thing, pushing the Kyoto protocol (from which your organisation may make billions) is quite another.

17 posted on 09/27/2011 10:32:15 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: perfect_rovian_storm
Thanks:

*******************************EXCERPT*************************************************

Dave Wendt says:

September 26, 2011 at 10:02 am

The panda is the perfect emblem for this organization as it represents so precisely the eternal triumph of style over substance. Over the years more millions have been spent to preserve this species than almost any other, based solely on the fact that they are cuter than a pair of lace panties on Scarlett Johansson. From the beginning it has been intuitively obvious that pandas are an evolutionary deadend. Even in unmolested natural environments they are reproductively incompetent. They have developed a specialized diet that depends on bamboos that regularly cycle through periods when they are fatally toxic for the pandas. But they are such adorable mobile teddy bears that we will probably continue to rathole millions on their preservation until their saga reaches its inevitable conclusion and they are reduced to a population of zoo specimens kept around because they always going to be good for the gate receipts. At that they will still have much more value than most of the other “endangered” species whose endangerment derives from being the same kind of evolutionary mistakes.

Of course for the modern environmental movement any expense or other human costs required for the mostly futile attempts to foil Mother Nature’s inevitable scythe are completely justified and even suggesting otherwise is considered sufficient cause for you to be targeted for near homicidal rage. At bottom the implicit reality of the enviros is that humanity is not an integral part of nature but a parasitic virus on the planet, more in need of reduction and control than Ebola, Bird flu, or malaria


18 posted on 09/27/2011 10:34:53 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The WWF was founded with oil company money.
19 posted on 09/27/2011 10:36:32 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
More:

***************************************EXCERPT**********************************************

Wade says:

September 26, 2011 at 10:08 am

“Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain! Big Oil is the one that only cares about money.”

Environmental groups are hypocrites. They rail against the profits of corporations that make life easier and better, while taking large sums of money themselves. The difference between Big Oil and Big Environment is that Big Environment’s goals are to make life harder. The biggest trick they have is to make people think they are poor saints struggling to make ends meet while they are trying to open our eyes while being actively suppressed the evil corporations and evil conservatives. Big Environment is not struggling financially. Big Environment is the one suppressing information. There is no conspiracy against them.


20 posted on 09/27/2011 10:40:42 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; All
More:

*****************************************EXCERPT***************************************

archaeopteryx says:

September 26, 2011 at 10:20 am

The IPCC grew with “EU” money
Greenpeace, I believe grew with “EU” money.
Over the last couple of years, they have been discredited for several well know reasons. Now it is WWF’s turn. Same speeches, same slogans, same senior staff connections to innocent German research, PR, and related institutions.

You have probably seen
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/secret-history-climate-alarmism
and
http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43291

What I can say, from my failing country, is that the world as we know it is falling appart. For the last 50 years we have had electricity from lignite and hydropwer. 2 years ago, wholesale electricity was at roughly $45-50/Mhr, demand is dropping, and our German Saviors plan to cover Greece with wind and solar gadgets pushing electriciy prices to over twice the previous levels. A mini Desertec. WWF has replaced Greenpeace as the key proponent of Green but they have identical promotional verbiage, straight out of Siemens’s marketing brochures.


21 posted on 09/27/2011 10:42:50 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Greenpeace also started with BP and Shell stockholders' money.
22 posted on 09/27/2011 10:58:15 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (GunWalker: Arming "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as well funded")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Thanks Ernest.


23 posted on 09/27/2011 5:30:40 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned....Duncan Hunter Sr. for POTUS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

“...the IPCC has been assimilated by influence from the WWF.”

And you thought Hulk Hogan was just a fake wrestler.


24 posted on 09/27/2011 9:39:18 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! You can vote Democrat when you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson