Slashdot Mirror

• Bob Carter
• Tim Ball
• Tim Patterson
• Tech Central Station

• Bob Carter
• Tim Ball
• Tim Patterson
• Tech Central Station

ExxonSecrets.org
Many articles on Professor Carter's "qualifications"
I'm sure that there are more links about this professor, but even if there are some scientific dispute about a specific study sited about global warming, the bottom line isn't really in dispute: human activity is having and will have for decades to come a noticeable impact on our global environment.

Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism...

That's Bob Carter, the Aussie researcher who says that global warming would be a good thing, and not Jimmy Carter, the former US President.

Sure, if you read the article carefully enough to remember the names exactly, you wouldn't get confused. But look where we are.

1133 21st St NW Suite M100 c/o Ralph R Brown Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-546-4242 Tech Central Science Foundation was formed in late November 2002 (Form 990). The Foundation appears to be a funding arm of the free-market news site, TechCentralStation.com.

ExxonMobil gave the Foundation $95,000 in 2003 for "Climate Change Support." According to Guidestar.org, a nonprofit research tool, the Foundation had 2003 income of $150,000 and $110,903 in assets. The Foundation commissioned a study by Charles River Associates alleging that the costs of the McCain-Lieberman bill of 2003 would be a minimum of $350 annually per household through 2010, rising to $530 per household by 2020, and could rise to as high as $1,300 per year per household. Related information: Tech Central Station was launched in 1999 as "a cross between a journal of Internet opinion and a cyber think tank open to the public" (TCS news release). According to Washington Monthly, TCS is published by the DCI Group, 'a prominent Washington public affairs firm specializing in P.R., lobbying, and so-called 'Astroturf' organizing, generally on behalf of corporations, GOP politicians, and the occasional Third-World despot." TCS shares office space, staff and ownership with DCI Group. ('Meet the Press' Washington Monthly, December 2003. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/031 2.confessore.html) Corporate funders of Tech Central Station include AT&T, Avue Technologies, The Coca-Cola Company, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds, Merck, Microsoft, Nasdaq, PhRMA, and Qualcomm (Tech Central Station website).

No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change.

1133 21st St NW Suite M100 c/o Ralph R Brown Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-546-4242 Tech Central Science Foundation was formed in late November 2002 (Form 990). The Foundation appears to be a funding arm of the free-market news site, TechCentralStation.com.

ExxonMobil gave the Foundation $95,000 in 2003 for "Climate Change Support." According to Guidestar.org, a nonprofit research tool, the Foundation had 2003 income of $150,000 and $110,903 in assets. The Foundation commissioned a study by Charles River Associates alleging that the costs of the McCain-Lieberman bill of 2003 would be a minimum of $350 annually per household through 2010, rising to $530 per household by 2020, and could rise to as high as $1,300 per year per household. Related information: Tech Central Station was launched in 1999 as "a cross between a journal of Internet opinion and a cyber think tank open to the public" (TCS news release). According to Washington Monthly, TCS is published by the DCI Group, 'a prominent Washington public affairs firm specializing in P.R., lobbying, and so-called 'Astroturf' organizing, generally on behalf of corporations, GOP politicians, and the occasional Third-World despot." TCS shares office space, staff and ownership with DCI Group. ('Meet the Press' Washington Monthly, December 2003. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/031 2.confessore.html) Corporate funders of Tech Central Station include AT&T, Avue Technologies, The Coca-Cola Company, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds, Merck, Microsoft, Nasdaq, PhRMA, and Qualcomm (Tech Central Station website).

No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change.

1.) Um, ok.

2.) http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.p hp?id=1134

You judge for yourself: http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.p hp?id=1134

Why Exxon Mobile of course!

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.p hp?id=1134

The website he writes for also did a great piece on how McDonalds was good for you, after they took a bunch of cash from McDonalds.

As was pointed out in the Digg discussion, Bob Carter gets his funding from Exxon...

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.p hp?id=1134

Accusing Richard Lindzen of being an Exxon-Mobil shill is nothing more or less than the truth. He's also working for a "news source" called TechCentralStation, which is the creation of a lobbying organization called DCI Group. Get the details here.

He's whining because he's been outed and whatever reputation he had as a scientist has been deservedly destroyed.

If he wants a job educating students, perhaps Oral Roberts University will hire him. Or maybe Lindzen's reputation is so screwed that even they'd stay clear of him.

Accusing Richard Lindzen of being an Exxon-Mobil shill is nothing more or less than the truth. He's also working for a "news source" called TechCentralStation, which is the creation of a lobbying organization called DCI Group. Get the details here.

He's whining because he's been outed and whatever reputation he had as a scientist has been deservedly destroyed.

If he wants a job educating students, perhaps Oral Roberts University will hire him. Or maybe Lindzen's reputation is so screwed that even they'd stay clear of him.

"Back up your answer with facts."

Good advice...

"All of the scientific consensus in the world has yet to produce a climate model that can *predict* the climate for *any* century in the past."

I call bullshit

"hockey stick" curve anyone?

I call implied bullshit

"hydrogen enthusiasts, water vapor is a greenhouse gas too"

Water vapour lasts 10 days in the atmosphere, unless you are expecting the oceans to boil what is the point of the second experiment you propose?

"Now a "consensus scientist" starts out with a single fact."

You have the terms scientific consensus and industry shill confused. Scientific consensus means the accepted scientific view, if you can point to ANY peer-reviewed study published in the last 10yrs that goes aginst the "scientific consensus" on AGW then please give a link to the abstract. While you are looking think about where all the FUD in the popular press could be coming from and who is paying for it?

After having said all that your first experiment asks some good questions that are still the subject of much research, however there are plenty of studies that attempt to answer them. The basic conclusion is "it depends on the exact method and logistics", some proposed systems are simply political-pork, others can make significant cuts in CO2 emmisions. OTOH: A strong global market for CO2 credits would rapidly find the most efficient large scale methods.

The IPCC report is published roughly every four years.

From your post it is obvious you have not seen the horse let alone have any evidence as to it's state of health. The credibility problems do not belong to the IPCC, you may find it surprising that a large proportion of the the reaserch in the reports has come from the cream of US institutions. Read or even just skim the reports, find out who wrote them, find out why they are so confident and compare their previous predictions to the actual outcomes. Don't just spam people with "junk science" propagnda, it makes you look nieve.

Thanks for the link but I already knew about the MET conference. I don't know where you got your information about the "presence of a large number of falsifiable hypotheses" at the MET confrence. Can you provide a link that gives a concrete example or perhaps one that points out the "serious proplems" with the 1991 IPCC report.

BTW, due to past experience I consider links that simply parrot the FUD from Fred Singer and/or ExxonMobil as SPAM and will ignore them. Here are a few myth busting links from Real Climate to get you started.

The promised information about him is here:

President, George C. Marshall Institute.

Adjunct Scholar, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Member, CEI Board of Directors. President and Founder, Solutions Consulting. President Emeritus, Global Climate Coalition. President, Solutions Consulting, Inc. Former Senior Vice President, Jellinek, Schwartz and Conolly, Inc. Chief Administrative Officer, Center for Naval Analyses.

According to federal lobbying records, O'Keef e was a paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil, 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the issues of environment and climate change, with contacts with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget. He writes frequently about climate change in his presidentail role at the George C. Marshall Institute.

O'Keefe has a long history of involvement with the fossil fuel industry. O'Keefe also served as Executive Vice President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a position he held until 2000.

...and on some of the organisations he works for:

Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1,645,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
George C. Marshall Institute has received $515,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
American Petroleum Institute
Currently "deactivated", the Global Climate Coalition was "A coalition of companies and trade associations seeking to present the views of industry in the global warming debate."

The promised information about him is here:

President, George C. Marshall Institute.

Adjunct Scholar, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Member, CEI Board of Directors. President and Founder, Solutions Consulting. President Emeritus, Global Climate Coalition. President, Solutions Consulting, Inc. Former Senior Vice President, Jellinek, Schwartz and Conolly, Inc. Chief Administrative Officer, Center for Naval Analyses.

According to federal lobbying records, O'Keef e was a paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil, 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the issues of environment and climate change, with contacts with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget. He writes frequently about climate change in his presidentail role at the George C. Marshall Institute.

O'Keefe has a long history of involvement with the fossil fuel industry. O'Keefe also served as Executive Vice President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a position he held until 2000.

...and on some of the organisations he works for:

Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1,645,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
George C. Marshall Institute has received $515,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
American Petroleum Institute
Currently "deactivated", the Global Climate Coalition was "A coalition of companies and trade associations seeking to present the views of industry in the global warming debate."

The promised information about him is here:

President, George C. Marshall Institute.

Adjunct Scholar, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Member, CEI Board of Directors. President and Founder, Solutions Consulting. President Emeritus, Global Climate Coalition. President, Solutions Consulting, Inc. Former Senior Vice President, Jellinek, Schwartz and Conolly, Inc. Chief Administrative Officer, Center for Naval Analyses.

According to federal lobbying records, O'Keef e was a paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil, 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the issues of environment and climate change, with contacts with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget. He writes frequently about climate change in his presidentail role at the George C. Marshall Institute.

O'Keefe has a long history of involvement with the fossil fuel industry. O'Keefe also served as Executive Vice President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a position he held until 2000.

...and on some of the organisations he works for:

Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1,645,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
George C. Marshall Institute has received $515,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
American Petroleum Institute
Currently "deactivated", the Global Climate Coalition was "A coalition of companies and trade associations seeking to present the views of industry in the global warming debate."

The promised information about him is here:

President, George C. Marshall Institute.

Adjunct Scholar, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Member, CEI Board of Directors. President and Founder, Solutions Consulting. President Emeritus, Global Climate Coalition. President, Solutions Consulting, Inc. Former Senior Vice President, Jellinek, Schwartz and Conolly, Inc. Chief Administrative Officer, Center for Naval Analyses.

According to federal lobbying records, O'Keef e was a paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil, 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the issues of environment and climate change, with contacts with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget. He writes frequently about climate change in his presidentail role at the George C. Marshall Institute.

O'Keefe has a long history of involvement with the fossil fuel industry. O'Keefe also served as Executive Vice President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a position he held until 2000.

...and on some of the organisations he works for:

Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1,645,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
George C. Marshall Institute has received $515,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
American Petroleum Institute
Currently "deactivated", the Global Climate Coalition was "A coalition of companies and trade associations seeking to present the views of industry in the global warming debate."

The promised information about him is here:

President, George C. Marshall Institute.

Adjunct Scholar, Competitive Enterprise Institute. Member, CEI Board of Directors. President and Founder, Solutions Consulting. President Emeritus, Global Climate Coalition. President, Solutions Consulting, Inc. Former Senior Vice President, Jellinek, Schwartz and Conolly, Inc. Chief Administrative Officer, Center for Naval Analyses.

According to federal lobbying records, O'Keef e was a paid lobbyist for ExxonMobil, 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the issues of environment and climate change, with contacts with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget. He writes frequently about climate change in his presidentail role at the George C. Marshall Institute.

O'Keefe has a long history of involvement with the fossil fuel industry. O'Keefe also served as Executive Vice President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, a position he held until 2000.

...and on some of the organisations he works for:

Competitive Enterprise Institute has received $1,645,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
George C. Marshall Institute has received $515,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
American Petroleum Institute
Currently "deactivated", the Global Climate Coalition was "A coalition of companies and trade associations seeking to present the views of industry in the global warming debate."

Thank god we have scientists like George H. Taylor quoted in those independent articles, and the companies like Exxon that fund their work. Working for Tech Central Science Foundation, Taylor consistently helps further the agenda of pure science and the protection of American Values (TM).

Not to mention the money Exxon generously gives to Bush.

Thank god we have scientists like George H. Taylor quoted in those independent articles, and the companies like Exxon that fund their work. Working for Tech Central Science Foundation, Taylor consistently helps further the agenda of pure science and the protection of American Values (TM).

Not to mention the money Exxon generously gives to Bush.

Oh, come on. The whole point is that the most vocal critics of climate change are paid off by companies with a huge stake in it. You can manufacture fantasies of power-mad ivory-tower cranks in white coats trying to destroy capitalism (If you don't imediately stop believing all else and do as we say, we're all doomed!), but the fact remains that reputable scientists don't have to be paid off by lobbyists to come to a conclusion. Those are not real scientists.

And you're just trying to muddy the waters, make it so that a casual reader of this discussion will conclude that there are crazy zealots on both sides and, gee, maybe we shouldn't do anything because science is divided on the issue. Which it ain't.

--grendel drago

p.s. Why can the GP poke fun at conservatives, but no one is allowed to poke fun at liberals?

Gee, I must have forgotten to say hello to the liberal firing squad on my way in. Careful with that crimethink, citizen, or it's room 101 for you!

You can poke fun at liberals all you want. It's another issue entirely whether your criticisms are valid or not. Biased "research" is a real problem.

We're all here for a good, honest exchange of idea. (Well, not the trolls and crapflooders, but they don't count.) On the other hand, it's the right, nay, the responsibility of every poster here to tell you when you're wrong.

--grendel drago

ExxonMobile gave $50,000 in 2003 to the International Policy Network.

and guess who's a contributing writer to the IPN

ExxonMobile gave $50,000 in 2003 to the International Policy Network.

and guess who's a contributing writer to the IPN

FACTSHEET: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change
DETAILS

P.O Box 25697 Tempe, AZ 85285-5697
Phone: 480-966-3719
Fax: 480-966-0758

The Center's current mission is to "disseminate factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content."

When the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change's web site debuted September 23,1998, The Western Fuels Association-funded Greening Earth Society issued the press release announcing The Center's new site. Fred Palmer, head of Western Fuels, stated in the release, "The Center's viewpoint is a needed antidote to the misleading and usually erroneous scientific claims emanating from the Federal scientific establishment and adopted by leading politicians, such as Vice President Al Gore." The Center has since tried to distance itself from the Western Fuels Association, but still regularly publishes articles on the Greening Earth Society website. The Center is run by Keith and Craig Idso, along with their father, Sherwood. Both Idso brothers have been on the Western Fuels payroll at one time or another. Keith Idso, then a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona, was a paid expert witness for Western Fuels Association at a 1995 Minnesota Public Utilities commission hearing in St. Paul, MN, along with MIT's Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels, and Robert Balling. (The Heat is On). According to news from Basin Electric, a Western Fuels Association member, Craig Idso produced a report, "The Greening of Planet Earth." Its Progression from Hypothesis to Theory," in January 1998 for the Western Fuels Association. (The Center also came into being in January 1998, according to information provided by the Center). (Basin Electric Latest News no date given)

FUNDING

Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has received $65,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

1998
$10,000 ExxonMobil Corporate Giving
Source: ExxonMobil 1998 grants list

2000
$15,000 ExxonMobil Foundation
project support
Source: ExxonMobil Foundation 2000 IRS 990

2003
$40,000 ExxonMobil Foundation
Climate Change Activities
Source: ExxonMobil 2003 Corporate Giving Report

---
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php? id=24

and you expect us to believe that this site is the "truth" ?

haha you people are more stupid that you act

Here's a Very cool site which uncovers the connection between corporate donations and think tanks. It would be really interesting to see a similar graphical map of Microsoft's influence. The designer of this site came up with an innovative way to visualize special interest connections.