• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donor's Trust - Billionaire Tax-Breaks to Fight Climate Change Opinion

Judith Curry has done much of her work for the Oil Industry. Her expertise is in Geophysics, an oil-industry desireable background.

Nothing but logical fallacies from you.

That's OK. I don't expect better from you.
 
Michael Mann apparently did not learn not to lie, and falsely claimed to be a Nobel Laureate.

Lack of integrity.

What does that say about his likely integrity to science?
 
Actually, I answered it, and the answer is no.

Oh, I forgot, you immerse yourself with the High Schooler Watts. We all know who is behind that nonsense.
 
Donors Trust recognized there are poeple who want to help the fight agaist activist science. they provide a way to do so.

What is wrong with people having such opportunities to put their money places they believe in or support?

Yeah, we remember - the Tobacco industry put a lot of money into their false science. Donor's trust is now spreading their false narrative with big corporate money from Exxon and the Heartland Institute.
 
How can you morally live with yourself?

Check your arrogance. I take pride in doing the right thing, and doing all I can to oppose a wrong-headed effort that threatens to retard the emergence of billions of people from poverty.
 
Check your arrogance. I take pride in doing the right thing, and doing all I can to oppose a wrong-headed effort that threatens to retard the emergence of billions of people from poverty.

Your fossil fuel rhetoric is so amusing. You hate high paying jobs like Wind and Solar are providing, and you love Government subsidies and Oil Wars which build our deficit, more than anything else.

But you wouldn't get paid, if you took that stance.
 
Your fossil fuel rhetoric is so amusing. You hate high paying jobs like Wind and Solar are providing, and you love Government subsidies and Oil Wars which build our deficit, more than anything else.

But you wouldn't get paid, if you took that stance.

It is one of the things that coarsens our public discourse: the inability to credit opponents with honorable motives.
 
It is one of the things that coarsens our public discourse: the inability to credit opponents with honorable motives.

From the original link:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network

The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of thinktanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarising "wedge issue" for hardcore conservatives.
 
From the original link:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network

The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of thinktanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarising "wedge issue" for hardcore conservatives.

And they conveniently disregard the 100+ times the funding research gets to justify political power over climate issues.
 
From the original link:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network

The funds, doled out between 2002 and 2010, helped build a vast network of thinktanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarising "wedge issue" for hardcore conservatives.

To which the appropriate reply is: so what? Free country. Free speech.
And then there's the arithmetic. $120M to 100 organizations = $1.2M per organization, divided by 9 years = $133K per year per organization = chump change.
 
[h=1]Strangling the Gorilla in the Echo Chamber of Your Mind[/h]Posted on 29 Dec 17 by GEOFF CHAMBERS 12 Comments
Lewandowsky Cook and Ecker (who he?) have two new articles at the Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. The first “Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and Coping with the ‘Post-Truth’ Era” “…explores the growing abundance of misinformation, how it influences people, and how to counter it. And outlines “a number of recommendations to … Continue re
 
Back
Top Bottom