Posted on 07/28/2006 5:40:37 PM PDT by neverdem
WASHINGTON, July 27 — Coal-burning utilities are contributing money to one of the few remaining climate scientists openly critical of the broad consensus that fossil fuel emissions are intensifying global warming.
The critic, Patrick J. Michaels, is a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute and Virginia’s state climatologist.
Dr. Michaels told Western business leaders last year that he was running out of money for his analyses of other scientists’ global warming research. So a Colorado utility organized a collection campaign for him last week and has raised at least $150,000 in donations and pledges.
The utility, the Intermountain Rural Electric Association, based in Sedalia, Colo., has given Dr. Michaels $100,000 of its own, said Stanley R. Lewandowski Jr., its general manager. Mr. Lewandowski said that one company planned to give $50,000 and that a third planned to contribute to Dr. Michaels next year.
“We cannot allow the discussion to be monopolized by the alarmists,” Mr. Lewandowski wrote in a July 17 letter to 50 other utilities. He also called on other electric cooperatives to undertake a counterattack on “alarmist” scientists and specifically Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” which lays much of the blame for global warming on heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide.
Mr. Lewandowski and Dr. Michaels, who holds a Ph.D. in ecological climatology from the University of Wisconsin, have openly acknowledged the donations and say they see no problem. But some environmental advocates say the effort clearly poses a conflict of interest.
“This is a classic case of industry buying science to back up its anti-environmental agenda,” said Frank O’Donnell, president of the Washington advocacy group Clean Air Watch.
Others, however, view it as the type of lobbying that goes along with many divisive issues. One environmental...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
But they don't see a government hell bent of controlling our lives through claims of "human caused global warming," funding junk science "research" as a conflict of interest...
Yeah, the greens don't paid. They do their "work" out of the kindness of their heart.
And how clear are Soros-dollars? Of course, those come in larger quantities.
Seriesly, though, parse the original sentence. What started out discussing specific environmental scientists has now degenerated to indirect quotes from unnamed "environmental advocates".
So where do the researchers on the global-warming bandwagon get their funds?
Or are they immaculately conceived?
It's not like there was any bias here. Just the very first sentence. God what a miserable slimey excuse for a newspaper.
I tried looking up Frank O'Donnell's credentials, but only seem to come up with "President of Clean Air Watch." I would be interested to see his scientific pedigree. Maybe he has one, but he sure must work hard to hide it. His titles seem to be "President, Director, or Executive Director" but there is no basis for the title(s).
Dr. Michaels, on the other hand, seems to have some real credentials (dare I say gravitas?) to speak on the subject:
Patrick J. Michaels (born c. 1942?) is a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, and the state climatologist for Virginia. His professional specialty was the influence of climate on agriculture. He is noted for his views as an opponent of global warming theory and frequently writes and speaks for popular audiences on the topic of climate change. He is a fellow of the Cato Institute and edits the World Climate Report, published by the Western Fuels Association through WFA's Greening Earth Society. He has received substantial financial support from the energy industry. His work has been published in Climate Research, Climatic Change and Geophysical Research Letters. He is the author of Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians and the Media, published by the Cato Institute, 2004.
Conversely, O'Donnell appears to be a complete scientific cipher, and unknown, a non-entity. I cannot find a single peer reviewed article published by O'Donnell, nor a list of his scientific accomplishments or credentials. Let us assume that he at least graduated from High School. O'Donnell's career seems to be made of cherry picking articles favorable to his point of view and publishing them wherever he can. And asking for donations at the top of his webpage. I wonder what O'Donnell makes for his "unbiased" role as self appointed expert on all things environmental.
He is the author of such objective gems as "The Return of Nazi Oil," a literary gem that associates a process that can make liquid fuels from coal (which, surprise, surprise, the U.S. has in abundance) with Nazis, and South Africa under aparteid. All references to "groups that stand to profit by its use in the United States."
Then there is the classic "Don't Believe the Oilman-In-Chief" which tries to convince us that the oil companies made us use MTBE (the fuel oxygenator that cleans the air and destroys your water supply), don't want to build any more refineries (even though they would be more efficient and profitable), and that the dreaded oil companies actually argued for the complex state based multiformulations of gasoline we have today.
I guess they should develop the process for free, right Frank?
If Clean Air Watch and its ilk want to criticize real scientists like Dr. Michaels, then get a director/president with a doctorate in the field and legitimately take him to task, rather than trying to disguise political hit pieces as having any resemblance to science.
The WSJ this morning said the U.S. gov't is spending $4 BILLION on GW, most of it given to scientists to conduct studies that "prove" it. And the enviroweenies go nuts over a measly $0.00015 BILLION spent to counter their so-called GW research.
I wonder if Clean Air Watch gets EPA grants?
"This is a classic case of industry buying science to back up its anti-environmental agenda"
no, this is a classic case of scientists who don't toe the political party line of the demagogues living off the taxpayers, being unable to get research funding from corrupt gov't funded institutions.
Global warming is the new Lysenkoism.
I understand they're doing some procreation research not involving the normal male-female zygote thing.
I tend to doubt that an advocacy group with their likely agenda would get EPA grants from this administration.
They mostly live on Foundation grants- the government subsidy is the "charitable" tax deduction.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39711fe7370a.htm
"The role of foundation grants in environmental advocacy "
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.