Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Beddington going | Main | Medics have too much time on their hands »
Tuesday
Mar272012

GWPF donor outed

So says the Guardian.

But he has nothing to do with big oil.

Ho hum.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (97)

They will forever keep repeating 'Skepticism is bad' and the masses will be brainwashed into thinking that all real scientists are evil. It seesm to matter not that the reputation of cience is being trashed, it's a price the zealots are willing to pay. Post Modernism will be the new way.

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:30 PM | Unregistered CommenterCamp David

@ henrybrubaker

Get some proper tories in

You see that's the problem right there.

And anyway, we need Oliver Cromwell, really.

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterJustice4Rinka

@geoffchambers

Our client, Little Weed, instructs us to remind you that she is a highly respectable example of her species despite any uncouth interpretations of her name made by the weak-minded sniggering classes.

She also wishes you to know that she has never dabbled in the occult, and like all right-thinking plants has no time whatsoever for fanciful and fantastic imaginings like 'teleconnections'.

Finally, mindful of her good name and standing in her community, she affirms most strongly that she has never met Michael Mann, never communicated with him and nothing short of a concerted attack on her person - or those of her seedlings - with a strong herbicide would induce her to even contemplate such a course of action.

And she warns that if Michael Mann or any of his associates approaches her with a 'core sampling device' she will scream Blue Murder and sue the scraggly little beard off him. A lady's age is her own business and has nothing to do with crazed psuedoscientists, however inflated their self-importance.

We remain Miss Weed's humble servants

Sue Litigate, Payne and Fears

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterSolicitors to Little Weed

Desperate, desperate, desperate.

Not many people seem to buy this rag though.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=48913&c=1

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:44 PM | Unregistered CommenterShevva

So who is BIG OIL funding if not climate sceptics?

What exactly are they doing with all that filthy lucre?

Why can't I have some of the sums of oil money that is apparently sloshing around?

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterMac

Geckko, thanks for posting that about Michael Hintze, what a great guy!

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM | Registered CommenterJosh

Solicitors to Little Weed
I had no intention of casting nasturtiums on your esteemed client. I just wondered if he had made any propositions or proposals - projections even - possibly involving rings? (You know what Menn are)

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:49 PM | Unregistered Commentergeoffchambers

Apparently the Guardian thinks that support for GPWF is some kind of crime and something to be ashamed of and "outed".
Well done Michael Hintze. Shame on the Guardian.
It kind of confirms the reasons I had for giving up reading the rag years ago.

Mar 27, 2012 at 4:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterDaveW

following an approach by a climate change project for funding.

So green marketing is basically "pay up or get smeared". What next? Severed wind turbine nacelles left in their beds?

Mar 27, 2012 at 4:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

" It revealed that the charity's income in the year up to July 2011 was £158,008,.."

The Guardian itself spends that much pro oting climate alarmism.

Warmists are being defeated by think tanks with tiny budgets.

Mar 27, 2012 at 4:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterCharlie A

Atomic Hairdryer

So green marketing is basically "pay up or get smeared".

Yeah that really gets me about the sub-text of this story. It seem to be OK to indulge in some sort of war on peoples good will. If Hintze is "shamed" sufficiently he will switch his money to their cause instead it seems is the message. Pretty low down behaviour and mercenary to-boot but tacitly accepted as Ok practice by the Guardian apparently.

I have an idea which organisation has done this. Appropos of nothing remember someone recently circulated a letter complaining about the GWPF hiding its funders? ;)

Mar 27, 2012 at 4:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

Pathetic isn't it? GWPF gets an income of £158k, a fraction of which comes from Hintze, and that makes it into the Guardian?

And Jeremy Grantham bankrolls alarmists including WWF, Greenpeace etc to the tune of tens of millions.

Guardian journalists have no sense of proportion.

Mar 27, 2012 at 5:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterScientistForTruth

@Scientist for Truth

'Guardian journalists have no sense of proportion'

Let me help you with that

'Guardian journalists have no sense.'

Fixed ;-)

Mar 27, 2012 at 5:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

Sorry - still got it wrong

'Guardian readers have no sense'

OK now.

Mar 27, 2012 at 5:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterLatimer Alder

I am furious.

This episode reminds me that Big Oil is not pulling its weight in helping to defend our economic world against the depredations of the crazed CAGWarmists.

Granted, I am grateful for all the energy and myriad other petrochemical products that make our modern lives possible.

Still, when it comes to support of rationality and common sense in the propaganda wars, Big Oil is mostly AWOL (except when they are funding leftist green fanaticism).

I mean really, where are all those evil funds from Big Oil when we need them??? No one on the side of science, truth, and rationality seems to get any help from Big Oil.

Mar 27, 2012 at 6:07 PM | Registered CommenterSkiphil

Little Weed made my day ;)

Mar 27, 2012 at 6:14 PM | Registered CommenterBreath of Fresh Air

What a load of rubbish. No opportunity to comment !

Mar 27, 2012 at 6:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterRoss Lea

Someone has been sitting on this info about Hinze since last September I think its release now is attempted payback by some disappointed green fund-raiser for the Skeptical Science non-event.

Hell hath no fury like a scorned greenie, apparently.

Mar 27, 2012 at 6:39 PM | Unregistered Commentermarchesarosa

Jamesp: "Bob is on it like a tramp on chips"

In our family the saying goes (think Hansen): "He's always on - like a tramp's overcoat"
Mar 27, 2012 at 12:54 PM | Registered CommenterSnotrocket
------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks guys, and also to Little Weed et al. Ya gotta laugh sometimes, it sure beats sniveling.

In Australia we say 'on it like a flock of seagulls on a chip'.

As for the funding issue, all I can say is that GWPF achieve more with their tiny budget than their bloated opponents do with many multiples of it. As a regular reader of their offerings, I am very impressed with the quality and quantity of their output, on less than the salary of one jobsworth in the upper middle of any bureaucracy you care to name.

Mar 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohanna

I don't know if Hinze paid the kind of money for a schmooze with Cameroon as the media are suggesting.

But, if he was hoping to urge just a bit of thought about Dave Boy's Gorebull Warming policies (or about Dave Boy's "Eurosceptic" inclinations [- according to the ever accurate Beeb (Sic! Sic! Sic!)] then I fear Hinze was done with his trousers up.

He'd be more likely to persuade the Pope of the merits of a Cargo Cult.

Actually, is he sure it WAS Dave Boy he had a meal with?

I mean, it could have been a cardboard cut-out!

Should have gone to SpecSavers, Michael......

Mar 27, 2012 at 7:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby

Mar 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM | Mac

So who is BIG OIL funding if not climate sceptics?

Easy:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120793/David-Cameron-forced-disclose-23million-donors-wined-dined.html

Ian and Christine Taylor: Mr Taylor, 55, is the president and group chief executive of the Swiss multinational Vitol, the third biggest oil trading company in the world with revenues of £186billion last year. He personally donated £466,000 to the Tories under David Cameron.

Big Oil funds Big Government (and UEA, environmental groups etc) to pursue 'green agenda' which, in Obama's language, causes energy prices to 'necessarily skyrocket'. High energy prices = big win for Big Oil and lots of luvverly tax take for Big Government.

What's not to like?

Mar 27, 2012 at 8:30 PM | Unregistered CommenterBilly Liar

From: XXX
To: Hintze, Michael
Cc: XXX
Sent: Thu Sep 22 09:12:46 2011
Subject: Request from XXX. Personal.

Dear Michael

Please see the attached letter, sent on behalf of the XXX. I shall also send a hard copy in the mail as a formal
approach from this organisation.

My best wishes

XXX


Who are XXX the sender and XXX the carbon (ho ho) copy?

If you were Hintze, and received an email marked personal in the subject line and it contained the persuasive eloquence of such an impressive heart-rending elicitation, would you be moved to get your cheque book out with tears in your eyes?

It seems Hintze has an excellent nose for the earnest and trustworthy, as opposed to the capricious opportunists with no moral integrity to refrain from the politically opportune snitch.

Mar 27, 2012 at 9:01 PM | Registered CommenterPharos

So the GWPF and Heartland have slaughtered the Green Meanies in two of the larger democracies with virtually no financial backing by the dastardly tactic of constantly repeating the truth. Scary what the truth can do when it gets loose,huh?

Mar 27, 2012 at 9:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterDisko Troop

(cough) Adam Werrity, Atlantic Bridge, ALEC.

Mar 27, 2012 at 9:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterJ Bowers

I just had a thought...Mr Hintze should release his original email so we can see who he was dealing with.

Mailman

Mar 27, 2012 at 10:47 PM | Unregistered CommenterMailman

Bob Ward has been twitting like Mrs Mills on speed today...he must be a worried man that his massively well-funded institution is being out-batted so convincingly. And it is ALL HIS FAULT.

Mar 27, 2012 at 11:11 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

Mailman

I just had a thought...Mr Hintze should release his original email so we can see who he was dealing with.

I totally agree, but I guess anything Hintze says now would get drowned out by the noise that is surrounding him. I think that is part of the cynical calculation of the Guardian.

I don't know about this Hintze guy (been out the loop of any Tory scandal) but if he is seen as being in the crap over some other donation in the media, and the climate charity/Guardian/Ward axis think they can take a nice tasty slice of the action for themselves with this, then I thnk it could backfire. I wonder if this is worth it? Leo never struck me as too smart. If you run a charity/non-profit and it gets known that you have a tendency to leak confidential documents like this I think it would do you more harm if your identity got known. Certainly more harm than the rather small "gain" in this situation.

Looking at the first redacted letter the charity/organisation sent to Hintze regarding "climate and health", and the fact it mentions they had someone at COP17 in December 2011, and put that together with some other Guardian published collaborations about GWPF funding recently, I don't think it is too hard to work out which organisation was sending Hintze begging letters.

Mar 28, 2012 at 12:11 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

Leopard ITB,
Your comment that 'Leo never struck me as too smart' almost made me blow coffee all over my keyboard with my laughter. The Guardian enviroloons are looking more and more like a group of nerdy and badly informed kids who want to take over the school magazine. And one always can tell when they are afraid that they have pushed their boat out too far and that they worry that the teachers will be cross with them - that's when they switch off the connection for readers comments.

Mar 28, 2012 at 1:46 AM | Unregistered CommenterAlexander K

A potential candidate organisation :

http://www.climateandhealth.org/magazine/read/climate-and-health-summit-durban-4th-december-_156.html

Mar 28, 2012 at 2:01 AM | Registered Commenteromnologos

Alexander K

Lol, now you mention it a blank statement of belief like that does seem like dry humour, but in this case I was just stating a blank conclusion, and with a measure of disbelief. The conclusion was sealed after the Heartland Institute "scoop" Leo was involved with. I may have missed it but Leo still hasn't given up a plain old "mea culpa" that he was too quick off the mark. The original page still has the lame "Update" only saying the HI "claim" a fake - leaving the veracity of the fake hanging - no follow up. You see he has moved on now. Either not too smart or just imbued with that special arrogant brand of ethics that that special brand of enviro-campaigners/pseudo-journos seem to own exclusively. EIther way it ends meaning that tactically (ah! tactical journalists!) he acts not too smart.

Mar 28, 2012 at 8:09 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

If you look through this huge page of UNFCCC accredited organisations - there are about 1500! - (these are the ones I assume who were at Durban), it is not as hard as you might think to go through the list of "health" related organisations ;)

http://maindb.unfccc.int/public/ngo.pl?sort=country_name_ARA_English

Mar 28, 2012 at 8:29 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

"The conclusion was sealed after the Heartland Institute "scoop" Leo was involved with."

Funnily enough, Heartland's Joseph Bast is President of ALEC. Lakely's there, too. Small world.

Mar 28, 2012 at 8:31 AM | Unregistered CommenterJ Bowers

J Bowers

"The conclusion was sealed after the Heartland Institute "scoop" Leo was involved with."

Funnily enough, Heartland's Joseph Bast is President of ALEC. Lakely's there, too. Small world.

Sorry if I don't fall over in amazement at that. But I don't move in your circles and what you have said is meaningless - I guess you are used to assuming your every utterance is drop dead gorgeous and stands as a neat conclusion? Bless - (as I said, it may not be, but it looks like dumb;) )

However you contrasted it with my statement about the "scoop" Leo came up with. Has the fake document become more real in the meantime? ;)

Mar 28, 2012 at 8:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

Omnologos

What a neat connection to the BMJ story yesterday - Climate and Health Council is an offshoot of BMJ group.

Mar 28, 2012 at 9:05 AM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

Yes Bish but still no "smoking gun"...unless somebody can link Leo and Nell? >;-)

http://www.climateandhealth.org/the_council.html

Mar 28, 2012 at 9:37 AM | Registered Commenteromnologos

BINGOOOOOOOO!!!!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/26/transparency-donors-climate-sceptic-lobby

Mar 28, 2012 at 9:48 AM | Registered Commenteromnologos

Looking into Hintze more I see he already, in 2008, had his name attached to an iea document called "Climate Change Policy: Challenging the Activists" which references Lawson (have a look I wont link) and includes a typical passge like this:

The intriguing thing is that some of the most prominent ice age doomsayers of the time included leading global warming enthusiasts of today. Notable among them were Sir Crispin Tickell (who later persuaded Margaret Thatcher to support the global warming thesis) in his Climate Change and World Affairs (see Lindzen, n.d.).

Which IMHO indicates HIntze wouldn't exactly be predisposed to a letter of the like he was sent from this mystery organisation.

Maybe this organisation didn't know about Hintze's previous climate associations? But with that discovery in my mind I just re-read the redacted begging letter from the mystery organisation and it amazes me more.

Quite a piece of work in climate rhetoric.

There is an interesting and strange latent attitude of entitlement in there to my eyes as if they expect something?

I mean it is quite astonishing that they say to Hintze with a straight face that the need for urgent action on climate has been shown and they need help NOW!:

...because of the urgent need for action on climate change and health, illustrated by events in the last few months...

Why bother with all the pesky epidemiological studies and weighing up extreme events in peer reviewed journals when this organisation can point to clear events in the last few months?! Like they can point to an attack by Godzilla or Aliens from Mars, the climate urgency couldn't be missed according to this sober organisation that is after money and then leaks emails when it gets rebuffed.

That kind of cant is probably exchangeable currency with the feeble minded of the Guardian ilk, but I am surprised they tried it on with Hintz?

Mar 28, 2012 at 10:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

Some of you may recognise this name attached to the wretched Guardian piece -- Graham Readfearn.

He is the ex-Courier Mail environmental 'reporter' who turned up for a climate debate with Lord Monckton in early 2010 at at the Brisbane Institute, and was handed his hat in such a devastating and public manner that he disappeared from public view within the week.

He has recently been seen at the occasional warmist blog, sniping away at Monckton, and now resurfaces at the Guardian, repeating the kind of drivel which enabled Monckton to make such public mincemeat of him 2 years ago.

Mar 28, 2012 at 11:27 AM | Registered Commenterrickbradford

Shocked I tell you.

It revealed that the charity's income in the year up to July 2011 was £158,008, compared to £503,302 in its first year.

That the GWPF can do so much with so little. (half an Gore after dinner speaking fee)
I had thought that heartland were performing miracles given their meagre funding.

Speaks volumes that "the movement" feels so threatened by so little.

"[..]regularly casts doubt on the science and cost of tackling climate change"

And the very last thing we want is debate or any exposure of the obscene carbon pork fest.

Mar 28, 2012 at 11:36 AM | Unregistered Commenter3x2

can someone ring these gus up and ask..

Leo Hickman has gone all coy..

So lobby group contacts private individual, privately, for money, a number of times.

Private individual turns them, down privately, saying my interests are different to yours..

Lobby group do not like private individual now (won't give money) found out he's funding another group, thatthey lobby agaisnt)

Lobby group 'leak' private emails to national newspaper, but remain anonymous..

pretty contemptable behaviour really....

ie no wonder they don't want the name released, lobbying by intimidation tactics..

Mar 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

The Bingo above -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/26/transparency-donors-climate-sceptic-lobby

The Climate and Health Council supports Nasa scientist James Hansen as he joins the campaign to uncover secret funders bankrolling climate sceptic Nigel Lawson and his lobbying think-tank (Climate experts back unveiling of Lawson thinktank donor, 23 January). The public may finally discover who is secretly influencing UK climate policy – contrary to scientific consensus – today (27 January), when the Information Rights Tribunal hears this key freedom of information case. Some anti-climate lobbyists routinely misrepresent and cast doubt on the work of climate scientists. Although Lawson and his Global Warming Policy Foundation have been discredited and attacked by numerous scientists and senior politicians, his thinktank continues to receive significant coverage, wrongfully distorting the public and policy debate over climate change.

--------------
I've got my 4 year old at home today(just going to the park now)

Can someone ring them up and ask the Climate and Health Council - if theirs are the emails that are redacted in the Guardian..

and to investigate how these private emails ended up in the Guardain's hands..

as surely they need to investigate, how this happened, otherwise it could be seen as lobbying for donors money by intimidation.. if this was officially sanctioned..

ethical behaviour form medics!!!

I'm sure, others can think of some other good questions...

Mar 28, 2012 at 11:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

Barry Woods

pretty contemptable behaviour really....

ie no wonder they don't want the name released, lobbying by intimidation tactics..

Totally agree.

The whole story reeks of Leo's tin-ear for projecting what he think is interesting and missing what is actually interesting.

Why approach it this this way?

The thing that gets me is the whole "I'm a real jounalist honest" posturing of the redacted emails. It is such a pose, and actually exposes more than I think he realises.

The whole secrecy behind the organisation was bound to fail and only makes it look all the more icky and tawdry.

Are we supposed to buy that some insider from this organisation leaked this and the Guardian are protecting their source?

Like Gleick is protecting his source?

Please!

Mar 28, 2012 at 11:52 AM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

Are we supposed to buy that some insider from this organisation leaked this and the Guardian are protecting their source?

I can well believe that they are protecting their source - from the revelation that they enjoyed funding of more than £158,008 in their latest financial year.

Mar 28, 2012 at 12:04 PM | Unregistered CommenterRichard Drake

I've found a different version of the redacted letter in an Afghan website (!) and it's now available at my new blog site omnologos.com.

The extended version includes

The carbon price legislation before the Australian parliament still faces much political and public opposition even though Australia is one of the heaviest carbon emitters in the world. Meanwhile, the capricious climate and extreme weather events in Australia this year, including severe flooding, especially Queensland, and ferocious bushfires in WA, make it clear we cannot afford to delay preventive action further. Drought and famine in Sub-Saharan Africa and floods again in Pakistan illustrate the disadvantage of developing countries and the imperative of more help from the developed world.
plus the actual requested figures (total of $150k, AUD I presume)

Methinks the Guardian guys published it with figures and details they later decided to remove, too late of course for the web not to notice...

Mar 28, 2012 at 12:27 PM | Registered Commenteromnologos

omnologos

Curiouser and Curiouser. Online Afghan doesn't seem to have any Afghanistan related content. Whois says it is registered in Harrow.

http://www.whois.net/whois/onlineafghan.com

Mar 28, 2012 at 1:18 PM | Registered CommenterDreadnought

omnologos

Hmmm, that extra info from the letter would seem to indicate it came from an Aussie organisation then. My first guess may be wrong. I note that Hintze has sponsored a guy who shows the more acceptable face of climate.

Alan Dupont is Michael Hintze Professor of International Security and Director of the Centre for International Security Studies at the University of Sydney.

That may have encouraged the mystery organisation to think he would be responsive.

Mar 28, 2012 at 2:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterThe Leopard In The Basement

I'm going to close this thread so we can continue on the new header post.

Mar 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.