Posted on 02/28/2008 8:07:21 AM PST by jazusamo
3-4” more inches of Global Warming will be in my driveway by morning. *ROLLEYES*
I’m jumpin’ on the “Global Cooling” Bandwagon. How can I make a buck off of it? Snowflake credits? LOL!
Sure does.
LOL! You just think that's a sign of cooling, it'll actually warm you up when you shovel it off the drive. :)
You don’t think that all those scientists and hanger-ons from the warming side paid their own way to the previous conferences, do you?
Dismissing things out of hand, especially before they even take place, intimates a bit of bias.
At least these guys aren’t holding the conference in a tropical area while the rest of the planet freezes:
“A new and very different conference on global warming will be held in New York City, under the sponsorship of the Heartland Institute, on March 2nd to March 4th — weather permitting.”
http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/ConferenceSchedule.pdf
You don’t think that all those scientists and hanger-ons from the warming side paid their own way to the previous conferences, do you?
Dismissing things out of hand, especially before they even take place, intimates a bit of bias.
At least these guys aren’t holding the conference in a tropical area while the rest of the planet freezes:
“A new and very different conference on global warming will be held in New York City, under the sponsorship of the Heartland Institute, on March 2nd to March 4th — weather permitting.”
http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/ConferenceSchedule.pdf
Sorry for the double post but I was dropped offf the browser and had to open a new window to repost.
What’s good for the goose . . . .
Thanks - got a nice laugh from your comment.
The other side never allows diversity of ideas - but they might have 3 gay liberal scientists, 4 brown liberal scientists, 16 liberal scientists with Hispanic surnames, and 2 liberal trans-gender scientists...
Well, it depends on your definition of "paying your own way". Most meetings charge a registration fee to attend; rarely does a meeting pay you to attend. If you think I'm wrong, check the sites for the American Meteorological Society or the Geological Society of America or IAVCEI (I know about them from my interest in geology and geochemistry). I'd love to go to IAVCEI's General Assembly, which happens to be in Iceland this year, a location on my dream trip list.
The early registration fee is $550, the late registration fee is $650 -- if you're a member. It's higher if you're a non-member. Student member early registration is listed as $450! (Grad students do NOT make a lot of money!)
So you have to pay your own way. Frequently this comes out of research funding. It might be argued that research funding is a way to get money to go to meetings, but still, rarely do you see a scientific conference offering to pay the attendees to come (and to pay their travel expenses to boot!)
Dismissing things out of hand, especially before they even take place, intimates a bit of bias.
Is it biased to judge it based on the previous track record of the sponsors? You tell me.
No more than it is for me to judge your reaction before I ping you. (Which is what makes it so much fun)
Their FUNDING is paying for their presentation of research that was funded by said funding. No difference.
The claims against anthropogenic global warming skeptics are often the same: they're all shills for big oil or other industry wishing to poke holes in the 'consensus theory' of global warming (which isn't a consensus at all). Under the so-called "politicization of science" program, George Soros' (the favorite fundraiser of many democrats) has reportedly given as much as $720,000 to Hansen to help package his alarmist claims and get them pushed by the mainstream media (The Soros Threat to Democracy):
How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely "NASA whistleblower" standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros' Open Society Institute , which gave him "legal and media advice"?
That's right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros' flagship "philanthropy," by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI's "politicization of science" program.
So he got some big paychecks from Soros - but was there a quid pro quo? The evidence certainly indicates as much.........
hmmmm, let's see if I were a dishonest scientist would I go with the skeptics side for $1000 or the Religionist side for $750,000
Great write up - nice to see that our writers are better than theirs...
You don’t think scientists are paid to travel to conferences?
LOL.
I have no knowledge of the sponsors of the event, or much of the scientists, though I’ve certainly heard Fred Singer’s name mentioned. However, I think there is no pretense of presenting both sides here. The purpose, which is perfectly reasonable, looks to be to present a point of view, not to decide on one.
OTOH, I would expect that the opinions previously arrived at by the attending scientists are just as likely to result from objective procedure as those arrived at by the members of the opposing camp.
Hi, Cogitator.
The Exxonsecrets link made a big deal about a nefarious Exxon connection with the Heartland Institute, stating...
Walter F. Buchholtz, an ExxonMobil executive, serves as Heartland's Government Relations Advisor, according to Heartland's 2005 IRS Form 990, pg. 15.
Read the tax return referenced and scroll down to page 15. You will find Buchholtz listed as an UNPAID advisor. Wow. Big smoking gun.
Want an even bigger smoking gun? He’s no longer even serving as an unpaid advisor. He’s not mentioned in the 2006 Form 990. Case closed. This is not only an ad hominem attack, but one that’s three years out of date at that. But let’s continue for the sake of argument.
Buchholtz was an unpaid advisor to a non-profit. And he works for an oil company. So what? Did that taint him? This individual is one of the most honored people in his field. He works for one of America’s great companies. Attacking his character simply because he disagrees with you is scurrilous, low, and an indication that you can’t win the debate on ideas and facts.
Here’s a news flash. Oil is not bad; it drives industry. Capitalism is not bad; it creates wealth and prosperity. Freedom of speech applies to everyone, even those who disagree with you. If the shareholders put up with it, Exxon has the same right as George Soros to promote a point of view.
What I don’t understand is why the greenies are so afraid of Heartland, unless it’s the general fear to test their hypotheses in a competitive arena (e.g., Gore’s fear of debate – though I’ve got to admit, it shows more rationality one would expect from a purported zealot). The fear cannot be centered on Heartland’s financial resources. According to the 990, Heartland doesn’t appear to have a lot monetary influence to peddle. The president of the organization’s salary was only $81K. The organization only raised $4.5 million and spent $2.4 million, banking the rest and spending it the following year. The money Heartland spent in 2005 was mostly for staff salaries (none of them appear all that well paid), publications, travel, seminars, etc. Only $93K went to the speaker’s bureau. For comparison purposes, that’s about the same amount of money that Al Gore gets in a month from Current, his failing media venture that nevertheless plans on an IPO.
If you want to talk about money, let’s talk. Very little money flows in the direction of the skeptics. The Feds spend billions on global warming each year. You’re worried about Heartland spending $93K or offering $1K individual honorariums?
James Hansen, the Goddard Institute of Space Studies director who always seems to be mouthing off about how he’s being censored (the only time he does seem to shut up is when Steve McIntyre catches Hansen screwing up the data), got $720K from George Soros and $250K from the Heinz Family Foundation, which is run by Teresa Heinz Kerry. After receiving the grant, Hansen publicly endorses Kerry for president. Remember, this guy is an employee of the taxpayers. If you worry about a lousy $1K honorarium from Heartland, I hope you’re screaming while doing cartwheels about Hansen.
Heartland only gets 5% of its funds from any one source, which means the most Exxon can contribute is a couple of hundred thousand dollars. By contrast, Exxon gave Stanford $100 million to study climate change. Does this tarnish Stanford? You linked to Exxonsecrets, a Greenpeace website. To be fair, let’s compare Greenpeace’s 2005 Form 990 with Heartland’s. It turns out that Greenpeace got $16 million and spent $13 million. Greenpeace’s top guy only worked 30 hours a week and got $115K plus $7K in a retirement fund. This doesn’t compare well with half million dollar salary that the president of the American Red Cross receives, but it’s still not bad for a part time job.
If you want to play the ad hominem guilt by association game, let’s play. The top Greenpeace guy was formerly the executive director of the Florence and John Schumann Foundation, which funds a plethora of leftist causes. What’s funny is how much oil and gas is in the foundation’s investment portfolio. Does this taint the Schumann Foundation, it’s former executive director, Greenpeace, the Exxonsecrets website, and the entire global warming support network?
The chairman of the board of Greenpeace owns a PR firm that’s done work for the dreaded DuPont. Does this taint Greenpeace? If you say no, then don’t try to claim the volunteer work of an Exxon employee taints Heartland.
Well, it depends on your definition of "paying your own way". Most meetings charge a registration fee to attend; rarely does a meeting pay you to attend.
Come on, there’s a big difference between attending a meeting and presenting a paper and speaking. Speakers are often paid. I know because I get paid to speak (and it's a lot more than $1,000 plus expenses). Speakers who are really good get a lot more. Speakers who are famous get still more, whether they’re good or not.
Honorariums are pretty darn common. I used to get one as a college student for serving on an athletic conference sportsmanship committee. The honorarium was tiny, but seemed big to me at the time.
For the last ten years, I’ve been involved with an industry conference where small business owners get a small $500 honorarium, plus travel. As a member of the conference’s advisory board, I speak for free every year and pay my own way (at least I get into the conference for free).
If you want to go to your rock conference and get paid, get published. Maybe someone will pay you because others want to hear what you have to say. Just don’t expect to get paid to listen. That privilege is reserved for congress.
This is what a group of British climate scientists wrote about "The Great Global Warming Swindle" mockumentary
Oh, give me a break. Do you want to open this up and compare Durkin’s documentary with Gore’s on the basis of scientific facts and accuracy? Greenie attacks on Swindle are addressed here.
If I seem over the top on this, it’s because we’re about to fundamentally reorder society around the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind. It’s surreal. It’s like Orson Wells’ broadcast of War of the Worlds lasted long enough to restructure society and mobilize for the Martian invasion.
Think about some of the absolutely looney things that have happened lately...
We’ve just banned the incandescent light bulb.
We’re turning the world’s best, most reliable power grid into an unreliable third world system.
California bureaucrats want to control consumer thermostat settings by remote control, no matter what the consumer wants.
Worse, the Californicrats want buildings to generate as much energy as they use.
This stuff is really happening. It’s command and control environmentalism. If you aren’t frightened by it, you should be.
Conferences are what the organizers make them out to be. It is just a sad fact that one cannot even organize a conference centered around being skeptical of the AGW theory without the AGW proponents ranting and raving. Heck, if their science is so sound, what do they have to fear ? Perhaps more then just fear itself. And flying in a over 80 presenters is a big expense. Sponsorship of some sort is required.
Excellent post. Thanks for responding.
You should add this post to your profile page.
Excellent post; thank you so much!
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.