Since 1989 the US government has given nearly $80 billion dollars to the climate change industry.
Thousands of scientists have been funded to find a connection between human carbon dioxide emissions and the climate. Hardly any have been funded to find the opposite. Throw billions of dollars at one question and how could bright, dedicated people not find 800 pages worth of connections, links, predictions, projections and scenarios? What’s amazing is what they haven’t found: empirical evidence.
The BBC says “there is a consensus and thus no need to give equal time to other theories”. Which means they are not weighing up the arguments, they’re just counting papers. This is not journalism. It’s PR. If the IPCC is wrong, if there is a bias, you’re guaranteed not to hear about it from any organisation that thinks a consensus is scientific.
When ExxonMobil pays just $23 million to skeptics the headlines run wild. But when $79 billion is poured into one theory, it doesn’t rate a mention.
Meanwhile, despite the billions poured in, the checks and “audits” of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe working against the well funded, highly organized climate monopoly. They have exposed devastating errors.
Why are the crucial checks of the science that underlie changes to entire economies left to unpaid bloggers and retired scientists?
Sources: “Climate Money” Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) based on US Government accounts.
TURN THE PAGES (Links will become active as pages are published). You are on the page in the Red Square.
|1||2||3||4||5||6||7||8 + 9||10||11||12||13||14||15||16||17||18||19||20|
This is page 4 of The Skeptics Handbook II. 20 page PDF
UPDATE: Dec 22 – I thought this past post deserved a few minutes in the sun so I’ve made it a “sticky post” for a few hours. I was very pleased with this diagram, but put this post out on a day with five other posts. I think each step above is crucial in the process of creating and maintaining a false crisis.