Posted by unregistered user at 9/20/07 12:39 p.m.

Thanks. I see that the first link you provide mentions the names of 2 funders from 2006:

* Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association Inc. (which Michaels said stopped funding his work after its support was made public; Tri-State received too much negative publicity);

* Intermountain Rural Electric Association (which stopped funding Michaels after a public campaign successfully changed its board of directors, according to Michaels).

Interesting.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/21/07 10:33 a.m.

This is an interesting list of observations, however, what is the intended point of your blog entry? There are two separate issues being hinted at here. 1.) Finding out who funds his work. 2.) More subtley, does who funds his work impact the validity of his work.

On issue 1.)I think you would agree that regardless of the specifics of who funds his work, as you state yourself he is "possibly the most prolific and widely quoted climate change skeptic scientist". As such, anyone from companies to private individuals that are on that list, should it be revealed, would be top targets for harassment and endangerment by human made climate change believers and evironmental extremists. For example, "...Greenpeace intervened in the case specifically to pry loose that list." It seems like a legitmate and resonable thing for someone to not want special interest/extremist groups like Greenpeace attempting to disrupt fundingof their work. Unless someone is postulating that he shouldnt even be allowed to do his work. Which also raises the issue of why any group would try to disrupt valid scientific investigation, and should they be allowed to?

2.) This isnt said overtly in your post, but it is implied, and certainly read into by your readers (like the one who sent it to me). I hope that both sides of this debate can see that Ad Hominem attacks are complete fallacy, and prove or disprove nothing. What matters is the validity of any points or evidence forwarded by either side, and that is where true debate can occur. The Ad Hominem arguements run in both directions, for the "majority of scientists" that are human made climate change believers, are working in a multi-billion dollar industry of funding as well. Grants from NGOs, Academia, like minded government parties, and so on, constitute sources that are no less biased, or pushing an agenda, then the oil industry. What matters is truth, fact, and proof.

Posted by unregistered user at 9/23/07 11:58 p.m.

The poster above sums it all up in his closing sentence. 'What matters is truth, fact, and proof.' If this were a genuine call for scientific objectivism, - who indeed could argue with that?
Except, this begs the question: Whose, truth, facts and proof?

Do we mean the objective, absolute scientific proof?
Or the ExxonMobil-infiltrated Bush Administration's version of the truth - heavily biased, cherry-picked and distorted to suit ExxonMobil's agenda to carry-on polluting?

The problem is that ExxonMobil, Western Fuels and others, aided and abetted by a small cadre of scientists have been running a co-ordinated concealed campaign of disinformation to deny, confuse, challenge and undermine the science underscoring climate change, the scientists, the IPCC and the Kyoto Protocol. The campaign was revealed by the leak of crucial memos!
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/exxon_report.pdf
The appendices are a little fuzzy, so here they are enlarged!
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/exxon-appC-part01.pdf
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/exxon-appC-part02.pdf
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_warming/exxon-appC-part03.pdf
http://www.realclimate.org/irea_letterJul06.pdf

This is the reason why it is important to know who funds who.
The poster's blatant LIE that the US Government who funds NASA, USGS, USFWS and NOAA, is pressing the climatologists and other scientist to bias their findings to falsely confirm GW and the anthropogenic nature of climate change is proof of the poster's BIAS! There is much evidence that the Bush Administration has been doing the precise opposite! Political interference under the Bush Administration has been more widespread and more pernicious than ever before.

Memos Tell Officials How to Discuss Climate
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
Internal memorandums circulated in the Alaskan division of the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service appear to require government biologists or other employees traveling in countries around the Arctic not to discuss climate change, polar bears or sea ice if they are not designated to do so.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/washington/08polar.html?ei=50

http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/

'Since taking office, the George W. Bush administration has consistently sought to undermine the view held by the vast majority of climate scientists that human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are making a discernible contribution to global warming.1 Despite promises by the president that "my Administration's climate change policy will be science-based,"2 the past several years have seen widespread political interference in the work of federal climate scientists, edits to official scientific documents and a general attempt to foster uncertainty about robust scientific conclusions...,'
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/global-warming-science.html

Scientific Integrity in Policymaking
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/Scientific_Integrity_in_Policy_Making_July_2004_1.pdf

Other Scientific Groups Concerned about Scientific Integrity
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/other-groups-addressing-scientific-integrity.html

There is a vast amount of information about political interference and manipulation of science by the Bush Administration.

Posted by ScaredAmoeba at 9/24/07 1:17 a.m.

Re: #53532 unregistered user at 9/21/07 10:33 a.m.

There can be no doubt that the Bush Administration employs many spin merchants like Frank Luntz. Such people make their living by cunning and misleading people.

A reality check is required here!

The environment and mother nature have neither eyes to see nor ears to hear and CANNOT BE FOOLED!

Posted by Fremont reader at 9/24/07 11:02 a.m.

Hey, we're all going down together in this ship -- Arctic ice, by some estimates, will be gone by 2030.

We ought to spend our energy coming up with ways to adapt to and ameliorate climate change.

Squabbling is a waste of time.

Posted by ScaredAmoeba at 9/24/07 10:43 p.m.

Maybe there is hope!

Large majorities around the world believe that human activity causes global warming and that strong action must be taken, sooner rather than later, in developing as well as developed countries, according to a BBC World Service poll of 22,000 people in 21 countries.

Global Poll: All Countries Need to Take Major Steps on Climate Change
Full report