Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard
Where is the science that you are depending on to throw out the conclusions of anthropogenic climate change?
Heartland Institute and Willie Soon are funded by oil companies - gee isn't that a conflict of interest?
|
What Neil would like to have us believe is that oil companies are only funding foundations and think tanks that do not support the climate change agenda. Actually the oil industry funds both sides of the issue. Why? "Isn't that a conflict of interest?"
To get a better understanding of how money and politics are involved, read this article:
Bret Stephens: Climategate: Follow the Money - WSJ.com
Anyone who understands how the game of politics is played knows that if you are a huge corporate or philanthrophic organization and have enough money to spread around, you can retain political influence by backing both sides.
The climate change activists are currently are making a big fuss over funding by the counter movement. Here is a quote from The Guardian over the amounts reported:
Quote:
|
The groups collectively received more than $7bn over the eight years of Brulle’s study – or about $900m a year from 2003 to 2010. Conservative think tanks and advocacy groups occupied the core of that effort.
|
$1 billion per year is a pittance compared with the staggering amounts at the disposal of various foundations, world banks and trust funds worldwide, to advance the climate change agenda. The money they control is just as "dark". It is not easy to find statistics regarding the number of foundations and banking interests involved, nor the amounts they have at their disposal. (To illustrate my point, try finding financial reports for foundations with actual $$$ figures online.) The media certainly isn't going to report it as "dark money" as they did with the counter movement. Meanwhile, the activists have seized upon media reports about "dark money" to portray the counter movement as being evil - although their activities are just as legal as the big money involvement of the world banks and foundations. The counter forces look like David, compared to Goliath.
For example, here is a list of donors from the website of the Climate Works Foundation:
Arcadia Fund
Children’s Investment Fund Foundation
Dutch Postcode Lottery
Ford Foundation
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment
Grousbeck Family Foundation
Heising-Simons Foundation
Kresge Foundation
McCall MacBain Foundation
Meher Pudumjee
Stiftung Mercator
Oak Foundation
Pirojsha Godrej Foundation
Pisces Foundation
Robertson Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation
Schmidt Family Foundation
Stordalen Foundation
Tilia Fund
TomKat Trust
TOSA Foundation
United Nations Environment Programme – Global Environment Facility
That is merely
ONE foundation devoted to the climate change agenda. There are many others.
To get some idea of how the Rockefeller Foundation distributes its grants, check this link:
Grants & Grantees : The Rockefeller Foundation
And remember, that is merely
one foundation, with their list filter set to showing only grants of $1 million or more, and the categories selected are only those regarding "Developing Climate Change Resilience" and "Green Jobs". The green movement money can also be spread through other categories with less specific earmarks, such as agriculture development, wildlife protection, etc. etc.
Why does Goliath feel so threatened by little David? After all, by comparison, he only has a slingshot...