Register to Comment
Like Tree13471Likes
  1. #11471
    PAD1OH PAD1OH is offline
    PAD1OH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,789

    start of the corporate distancing from Heartland Leak

    A spokeswoman for GSK sought to distance the company from the Heartland Institute's work on climate change. "GSK absolutely does not endorse or support the Heartland Institute's views on the environment and climate change," she said. "We have in the past provided a small amount of funding to support the Institute's healthcare newsletter and a meeting."
    Will Heartland Institute scandal force transparency on corporate donors? - 15 Feb 2012 - Analysis from BusinessGreen
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #11472
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,395

    Quote Originally Posted by PAD1OH View Post
    Certainly, some fascinating material has come to light.

    Details like this are priceless (from http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta...Strategy.pdf):

    Funding for selected individuals outside of Heartland.
    Our current budget includes funding for high-profile individuals who regularly and publicly
    counter the alarmist AGW message. At the moment, this funding goes primarily to Craig Idso
    ($11,600 per month), Fred Singer ($5,000 per month, plus expenses), Robert Carter ($1,667 per
    month)
    , and a number of other individuals, but we will consider expanding it, if funding can be
    found
    Idso, a well known denialist shill, gets $139,200 per year! How many science grants would that make up?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #11473
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,395

    More from http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta...20Strategy.pdf

    Expanded climate communications
    Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in-house
    experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences,
    and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of
    rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts).
    Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow highprofile
    climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own.

    This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate and it is important to keep
    opposing voices out. Efforts might also include cultivating more neutral voices with big
    audiences (such as Revkin at DotEarth/NYTimes, who has a well-known antipathy for some of
    the more extreme AGW communicators such as Rornm, Trenberth, and Hansen) or Curry (who
    has become popular with our supporters). AVe have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in
    2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature station data.
    Sounds like a plot to suppress new science to me.

    Nice to see that our Anthony is on the money trail, too. Hmmm, that means the one about "only being in it for the grant money" can't be used any more.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #11474
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,395

    Yet more again:

    Funding for parallel organizations.
    Heartland is part of a growing network of groups working the climate issues, some of which we
    support financially. We will seek additional partnerships in 2012. At present we sponsor the
    NIPCC to undermine the official United Nation's IPCC reports and paid a team of writers
    $388,000 in 2011 to work on a series of editions of Climate Change Reconsidered. Expenses will
    be about the same in 2012. NIPCC is currently funded by two gifts a year from two foundations,
    both of them requesting anonymity. Another $88,000 is earmarked this year for Heartland staff,
    incremental expenses, and overhead for editing, expense reimbursement for the authors, and
    marketing[/U]
    .
    The word "marketing" is interesting and accurate. This is most certainly not science.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #11475
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,395

    More on the exposure of the denialist funding machine at the Heartland Institute.

    An anonymous donor calling him (or her)self "Heartland Insider" has released the Heartland Institute's budget, fundraising plan, its Climate Strategy for 2012 and sundry other documents (all attached) that prove all of the worst allegations that have been levelled against the organization.

    It is clear from the documents that Heartland advocates against responsible climate mitigation and then uses that advocacy to raise money from oil companies and "other corporations whose interests are threatened by climate policies." Heartland particularly celebrates the funding that it receives from the fossil fuel fortune being the Charles G. Koch Foundation.

    Heartland Institute budget and strategy revealed | Deep Climate

    Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network

    Richard Littlemore | Heartland Insider Exposes Institute's Budget and Strategy
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #11476
    Pat Gill Pat Gill is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,434
    Twitter
    @

    Quote Originally Posted by Tombo View Post
    Making stuff up again?


    Ok Tombo maybe a slight exageration, it must of been the mental picture I had of you throwing your arms in the air and saying ITS ALL A MISREPRESENTATION.

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #11477
    PAD1OH PAD1OH is offline
    PAD1OH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,789

    the BBC are now running the story and the Heartland has issued a statement claiming it's all a forgery.

    i'll remain skeptical but I will admit to not trusting the Heartland Institute or their known funders.

    I would like the Heartland institute to release all their funding/budget documents and related meeting minutes so that we can clear this leak up.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #11478
    PAD1OH PAD1OH is offline
    PAD1OH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    3,789

    hmm. now even not-so-liberal Forbes have articles calling out HI

    Heartland And DeSmogBlog Square Off Over Incendiary Documents - Forbes
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #11479
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is online now
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    36,395

    Richard Black of BBC has a good article on the exposure of the Heartland Institute.

    This appears to add a new ingredient to the debate over what to call organisations like the Heartland Institute. Neither think-tank nor lobby group appears to work when the organisation is changing its output on the basis of what its funders want it to do: perhaps "public relations" would work best?

    This has one very practical dimension in that under US law, the amount and type of campaigning that non-profit organisations can do without endangering their tax-free status is constrained; and a number of commentators, including desmogblog itself, are arguing that the Heartland Institute is going beyond what it's permitted to do.

    Whatever the rights and wrongs of that, the big issue is surely this: when the Heartland Institute speaks on climate change, it is speaking with the money, fundamentally, of one major donor.
    AFAIK, only one document is claimed by Heartland to be a forgery.

    The Heartland Institute may be in danger of losing tax-exempt status, and a damn good thing, too.

    Please go read what John has to say, but the summary is that Fred Singer's Science and Environmental Policy Project, the Heartland Institute, and possibly others have given more than sufficient grounds for IRS agents and/or state Attorney General offices charged with supervising charities to start using some subpoena power. They're supposed to be educational, but are the opposite. In SEPP's case, they appear to have a non-functioning board, including a chairman who continued to supervise Singer two years after the chairman had died. They sign affidavits saying they're not lobbying when they sure appear to be doing so. And money flows are incredibly weird, with assets disappearing and sometimes reappearing in strange ways.
    BBC News - Openness: A Heartland-warming tale

    Rabett Run: The dead are allowed to vote - on the Board of Directors of a denialist, tax-supported charity
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #11480
    Tombo Tombo is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    7,251

    Quote Originally Posted by PAD1OH View Post
    the BBC are now running the story and the Heartland has issued a statement claiming it's all a forgery.

    i'll remain skeptical but I will admit to not trusting the Heartland Institute or their known funders.

    I would like the Heartland institute to release all their funding/budget documents and related meeting minutes so that we can clear this leak up.
    I just spat my coffee all over my keybaord


    I am sure the Heartland Institute would be happy to once:

    • La Gore
    • the IPCC
    • Michael Mann
    • Phil Jones
    • Greenpeace
    • WWF
    • etc. etc. etc.




    bring themselves to do the same.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment