How much is that denialist in the window....
The one with co-authorship on such things as the OISM petition, the Energy and Environment paper on Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A Reappraisal Volume 14, Numbers 2-3, 1 May 2003, pp. 233-296(64), Willie Soon, well in 2004 he got a $60,000 consulting fee from the Frontiers of Freedom Institute.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
19 comments:
What about the much ballyhooed Sally Ballyhoonis?
What's she been doing lately?
What a whore. Inside skinny for those of you not in DC and privy to the Beltway information. The guy running Freedom Frontiers, Robert Ferguson, is a former congressional staffer. He loves showing up at any event on climate change and arguing with the scientists. He's very pale and when he gets worked up, he turns beat red.
By the way, how much did our own Roger Pielke Jr. rake in when he wrote for the Cato Institute? Can anyone post the goods?
Mus musculus anonymouse
Must compliment the Rabett on his excellent use of Guidestar. By the way, did you notice from the Frontiers of Freedom IRS form that their address is a PO Box?
That really inspires confidence in the legitimacy of this organization. It shows that they are smart enough to rent a post office and not list Robert Ferguson's home residence as their real base of operation.
Mus musculus anonymouse
A lot of these orgs have a PO box, but even better some of them has these great sounding organizations like the "Centre for Climate/Ocean Resource Studies" and when you cross-reference the address with their name in a 411 directory, their "Centre" is their personal residence.
Um, my center is in my basement, but don't talk too loud 'cause my mom is sleeping.
Keep up the great work Eli, yer still the funniest!
Kevin@demogblog.com
OMG, you are so lame. What does this proof? Nothing.
This kind of naive argumentation is kinda typical for environmentalist like you. Following you argumentation line, none of the Greenpeace financed studies are credible too.
I see, you differentiate in good and evil, and "denialists" are evil, because they don't blieve in the curch of global warming.
And WTF? You have lists of "denialists"? What is this? Informers paradise?
and btw: nobody "denies" global warming or climate change of any kind. By using the term "denialist" you just want to create a connotation between climate skeptics and holocaust denialists.
You really suck.
Anon. 11.28pm: You're smudging your potato print. :)
Another interesting thing. On page 2, line 22 of the Frontiers of Freedom 990 form. it says that FF has given $104,211 in "grants and allocations." Then on page 17, it gives a breakdown of this money, and the beneficaries are SEPP and New Hope. These are the outfits of Fred Singer and Pat Michaels, respectively.
Some of these people have made a lot of money over the past few years doing consulting for Exxon Mobil and the like, but their scientific careers are effectively over. They have squandered their credibility.
What real scientist is ever going to take them seriously again?
Re: "Curch (sic) of global warming" I know that's meant unkindly, but I think it has a nice ring to it. A while back a pair of pamphlet-distributing earnest types showed up on a Sunday afternoon. Nothing like the doorbell on Sunday afternoon to set my teeth on edge. Anyway, I told them we were "rationalists" and they were completely flumoxed. Probably never heard the word before, but I'm sure they concluded that we were devil-worshipers or something. To my point--why the heck not? If churches can be established on all manner of laughable grounds, perpetuated only memes that extort 'good behavior' from the amygdala of unprotected host organisms, why can't we have a church based on ideas that make sense??? This would also be a step in the direction for defeating the silly idea that only religion can be a basis for ethical systems. ASTasb #bs (sorry, I fell off my chair laughing and dropped the keyboard).
Ye faithful are hereby granted the authority to refer to one another by righteous titles and proclaim peer-reviewed literature to be holy works, so long as they shall be subject to future corrections.
-St. Annoy.mous (http://wordsmith.org/anagram/)
Anonymous 2:22.
Yes. And if you check the 990s for Cato, you'll find annual grants to New Hope. That's the Pat Michaels/Chip Knappenberger outfit.
So they are essentially Cato proxies.
That comment above looks like something John A would write (full of spelling mistakes and the like).
If I did not know that such stupid people existed, I would think it was an intentional joke.
It is a joke, of course, but whether that was the intention, I honestly don't know.
I was referring to the
"OMG, you are so lame. What does this proof?" comment, of course.
What does this proof?
It don't proof nothing.
Cato Institute gives all Libertarians a bad name.
The only difference between them and whores is that whores provide something of value for the money.
Professor Rabbett, I love this blog. It's so great to read stuff that's whip-smart and funny too. Thanks for all your work and witty-ness on our behalf.
I hereby nominate the guys over at RealClimate as the official Scholars and Keepers of Doctrine; and I nominate Prof. Rabbett and St. Annoy.mous as the first members of the College of Cardinals of the Church of Global Warming.
St. Annoy.mous: You win! That's the best anonymouse name ever.
Cheese! and crackups,
Anothermouse
Oh! Hahahaha! I just 'got' fergus's 'potato print' bit.
Can I quote you?
Anothermouse
bella; you can read my definition of a 'potato print sceptic' on my little blog. Feel free to use it if you like it. I think it makes a point succinctly. Unlike most of the other things I write. Eli's is better than mine.
Regards,
Iamnota.mouse
I'm calling them "climate cranks".
http://hot-topic.co.nz/
Shameless plug...
(I'm trying to join the non-furry, broad spectrum sceptobiotic tendency)
Welcome Gareth, we are always open to shameless plugs of good new blogs. Now all you need is a few bad jokes and bang, you are on the blogroll.
Sceptobiotic should of course read antisceptic. It would have been Dettol in my youth.
Jokes? With cranks like ours, we've got plenty.
Post a Comment