Hack Mashey doc

=<div><div>masheyHacks</div><div>
</div><div>megadoc</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>http://desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/fake.pdf</div><div>
</div><div>1</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax</div><div>SEPP, Heartland, CSCDGC, allies & DONORS</div><div>John R. Mashey</div><div>02/14/12</div><div>Contents</div><div>Executive Summary 2</div><div>Fig. ES.1 Murky maze of money, memes 3</div><div>0. Front Matter 6</div><div>0.1 Advice on reading this report 6</div><div>0.2 Key references and further reading 6</div><div>0.3 Glossary 7</div><div>0.4 501(c)(3) non-profits, IRS-?? tags 8</div><div>0.5 Memes 11</div><div>0.6 Recipient glossary and top funders 12</div><div>0.7 Tobacco Playbook, climate anti-science 13</div><div>1 Introduction 14</div><div>2 SEPP, Singer and 2 years of dead Chairman 15</div><div>3 SEPP’s funny finances 17</div><div>Fig. 3.1 – SEPP at a glance 1998-2010 17</div><div>4 Heartland, tobacco, NIPCC and CSCDGC 18</div><div>5 Allegations 20</div><div>6 Conclusions 21</div><div>A. SEPP 1998-2010 by Form 990s 22</div><div>A.1 Governance or lack thereof 22</div><div>Fig. A.1.1 Board, roles, hours/week 22</div><div>A.2 Financials overview 23</div><div>Fig. A.2.1 Financials from 990s 23</div><div>Fig. A.2.2 Support, expenses 24</div><div>Fig. A.2.3 Assets and trading 24</div><div>Fig. A.2.4 Known grants to SEPP 25</div><div>A.3 Program expenses 26</div><div>Fig. A.3.1 Program Expenses 26</div><div>Fig. A.3.2 Program service revenue vs expenses 27</div><div>B. SEPP income partially visible, usually obscure 28</div><div>B.1 Tobacco funding chains 28</div><div>B.2 Fossil energy funding chains 28</div><div>C. SEPP research, education, science … not 30</div><div>C.1 Singer professional background 30</div><div>C.2 Peer-reviewed papers few, weak 30</div><div>C.3 Books and talks 31</div><div>C.4 Articles for general public 32</div><div>C.5 Influence on public opinion? 33</div><div>C.6 Summary 33</div><div>E. NIPCC –Council for Tobacco Research reborn? 34</div><div>Fig. E.1 NIPCC People, Activities, Orgs 36</div><div>F. Advocacy anti-science - start with tobacco 37</div><div>Fig. F.1 General flow of money, memes 37</div><div>Fig. F.2 1984~ % smoking starts by age 38</div><div>Fig. F.3 % smoking starts, from F.2 38</div><div>Fig. F.4 Philip Morris 1991-2001 funding 39</div><div>Fig. F.5 What did think tanks do for PM? 40</div><div>G. Heartland Institute funding and elected officials 43</div><div>G.1 Joseph Bast defends Joe Camel, wants $ 43</div><div>G.2 Heartland and some donors 1999- 2003 48</div><div>G.3 Climate outreach, elected officials 50</div><div>G.4 Legislator’s Guide to G. W. Experts 51</div><div>G.5 Prospectus the audience is legislators 54</div><div>H. Heartland Financials 55</div><div>H.1 Overview 55</div><div>Fig. H.1.1 Financials 55</div><div>Fig. H.1.2 Support, expenses 56</div><div>Fig. H.1.3 Assets and trading 56</div><div>Fig. H.1.4 DONORS, the big donor 57</div><div>Fig. H.1.5 DONORS and others itemized 58</div><div>H.2 Program service expenses 60</div><div>Fig. H.2.1-1 Program service expenses 60</div><div>Fig. H.2.1-2 Program Service Expenses 61</div><div>H.3 Grants and allocations 62</div><div>Fig. H.3.1-1 Grants and allocations 62</div><div>Fig. H.3.1-2 Grants and allocations 63</div><div>H.4 Funny foreign grants -NZ, CA, AU, IN? 64</div><div>I. Follow the money to DONORS Trust/Capital 65</div><div>I.1 Philanthropy Roundtable 65</div><div>I.2 Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund 66</div><div>K. CSCDGC, CO2Science, SPPI and Ferguson 69</div><div>K.1 A tax-free Idso family business 69</div><div>Fig. K.1.1 Money to FoF, CSCDG, SPPI 70</div><div>Fig. K.1.2 CSCDGC, CO2Science finances 71</div><div>K.2 CO2Science – Craig’s subsidiary 72</div><div>K.3 Robert Ferguson and SPPI (fake entity) 73</div><div>K.4 Summary 74</div><div>N. Nature, Science and AAAS. 75</div><div>N.1 Nature 75</div><div>N.2 Science 76</div><div>N.3 AAAS statement 28 June 2011 77</div><div>P. American Institute of Professional Geologists 78</div><div>W. Environment and Climate News analysis 82</div><div>W.1 Overview 82</div><div>W.2 Readership primarily elected officials 83</div><div>W.3 Words and viewpoints 84</div><div>W.4 Articles, advertisements chronology 86</div><div>Fig. W.4.1 Common E&CN content 86</div><div>X. E&CN Authors and some quotees 87</div><div>X.1 Key contributors - overview 87</div><div>Fig. X.1.1 E&CN selected contributors 89</div><div>X.2 Brief biographies of relevant authors 90</div><div>Y. E&CN – the most common deceptions 100</div><div>Y.1 Global Satellite Temperatures 100</div><div>Y.2 Crichton is Right! Wrong. 102</div><div>Z. E&CN Excerpts and annotations 105</div><div>Z.2001 5 issues 105</div><div>Z.2002 10 issues 111</div><div>Z.2003 9 issues 121</div><div>Z.2004 9 issues 129</div><div>Z.2005 10 issues 138</div><div>Z.2006 10 issues 148</div><div>Z.2007 10 issues 155</div><div>Z.2008 8 issues 170</div><div>Z.2009 3 issues 180</div><div>Z.2010 4 issues 190</div><div>Z.2011 7 issues 199</div><div>Z.2012 1 Issue. 212</div><div>Fred Singer Craig Idso Whitney Ball Joseph Bast Joe Camel Diane C Bast Z.2008.07-8 James Taylor</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>2</div><div>Executive Summary</div><div>Science is built through credible peer-reviewed journals, but</div><div>anti-science or “advocacy science” uses OpEds, blogs,</div><div>newsletters and personal attacks on scientists. It is fake</div><div>“advocacy science” designed to confuse non-scientists, often for</div><div>financial and/or ideological reasons. Modern anti-science was</div><div>created by the tobacco industry in the 1950s and then used against climate</div><div>science, often by the same well-experienced think tanks and individuals.</div><div>? “Fake science” reports have long been used by tobacco companies and</div><div>others who privatize profits and socialize large losses or risks</div><div>? “Independent experts” write fake science reports that would quickly be</div><div>rejected by real science journals, but confuse the target audience.</div><div>“Fakexperts” such as Michael Crichton are relentlessly quoted and</div><div>promoted as though scientifically credible.</div><div>? Fake education and disinformation is distributed via well-organized PR</div><div>channels, newsletters, blogs, often to legislators.</div><div>Some think tanks clearly focus on PR and lobbying, not research or</div><div>education, but still claim to be tax-exempt 501(c)(3) public charities. Some</div><div>“patterns and practices” of odd money flows emerge only by comparing</div><div>sets of charities’ public IRS Form 990s with external context.</div><div>S. Fred Singer is President of the Science and Environmental Policy</div><div>Project (SEPP), but has done almost all the work himself for 20 years.</div><div>A trek through his and other 990s unearthed many curiosities.</div><div>Singer claimed Frederick Seitz as Chairman for two years after his demise</div><div>and 20 years after a Philip Morris staffer had written in 1989:</div><div>“Dr. Seitz is quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice.”</div><div>SEPP’s finances were curious. SEPP paid no salaries, even for Singer’s</div><div>60-hour workweeks. Money flowed oddly. Asset trades often exceeded</div><div>normal income and they accumulated to $1.5M, tax-free.</div><div>Heartland Institute’s Joseph Bast staunchly defended “Joe Camel,” the</div><div>infamous campaign to addict younger children. Heartland got tobacco</div><div>funding for many years, along with a Philip Morris Board member.</div><div>Whitney Ball’s DONORS TRUST funded a major expansion of Heartland</div><div>climate anti-science. Singer collected old associates to help write</div><div>“NonGovernmental International Panel on Climate Change“ (NIPCC)</div><div>reports, filled with unsupported claims and long-refuted anti-science.</div><div>He was helped by Craig Idso, of the Center for the Study of Carbon</div><div>Dioxide and Global Change (CDCDGC), whose money flows also seem</div><div>unusual. Robert Ferguson’s Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) was</div><div>a website and a PO Box in a UPS store and he was actually a CSCDGC</div><div>employee.</div><div>Under Jay Lehr and James Taylor, anti-science permeated Heartland’s</div><div>Environment and Climate News (E&CN) sent mostly to elected officials.</div><div>Heartland incessantly touted its access and influence with such officials,</div><div>but its tax forms claimed no lobbying. It ran “fake science” conferences,</div><div>paying for government staff attendance. It sent money to foreign noncharity</div><div>advocacy groups, sent anti-science handbooks to school boards and</div><div>urged parents to complain. It has been criticized in Nature and Science.</div><div>Free speech allows people to express opinions, even lie about facts, but</div><div>tax-free operation is a revocable privilege. Spreading factual untruths</div><div>and confusion about smoking or climate science is neither research nor</div><div>education in the public interest I allege that:</div><div>? SEPP, Heartland, CSCDGC and others are really advocacy groups</div><div>that have repeatedly abused the rules of tax-free public-charity status,</div><div>? that funders have paid for advocacy beyond that allowed, that there is</div><div>already much evidence for status revocations,</div><div>? that the IRS could unearth much more financial fakery.</div><div>The next page summarizes flows of money and the memes (advocacy) that</div><div>it buys. It is a murky money maze filled with fake science, fakexperts,</div><div>funny finances, all free of tax.</div><div>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</div><div>Dr. Mashey is an easy-to-Google semi-retired Bell Labs (1973-1983) / Silicon</div><div>Valley (1983-) computer scientist, corporate executive and a nonprofit Trustee.</div><div>He has worked with a wide variety of scientists and engineers, many of whom</div><div>have used software or hardware he helped create.</div><div>He was profiled in Science for his efforts against climate anti-science:</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/science-article-recognizes-john-mashey</div><div>He is a member of AAAS, AGU, APS, ACM, and IEEE CS.</div><div>JohnMashey (at) yahoo DOT com</div><div>Merchants of Doubt</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>3</div><div>Fig. ES.1 Murky maze of money, memes</div><div>Some corporations and private foundations fund a network of public</div><div>charities, whose people write articles, quote each other and participate in</div><div>various anti-science efforts, including writing through many other</div><div>channels. Anti-science memes (ideas, talking points) are generated,</div><div>preferably by PhDs, amplified and repeated endlessly through the PR</div><div>network (red boxes and arrows). Memes are seen so often they have gotten</div><div>standard debunking numbers, tagged Meme-nn, listed in §0.5.</div><div>IRS-?? Tags indicate obvious/ possible violation of 501(c)3 public charity</div><div>rules, as per §0.4. The 12 US charities here got ~$47M ~2009.</div><div>Charities both cooperate and compete for funding and may act as conduits</div><div>to others. This is just a subset of the known connections and flows</div><div>explained here. Their approach bypasses inconvenient science via</div><div>“grassroots-treetops” political campaigns.</div><div>Following are 2 pages of excerpts from E&CN, so the reader can quickly</div><div>experience the “education” delivered most months to elected officials.</div><div>GMI</div><div>F. Seitz</div><div>R. Jastrow</div><div>W. Happer</div><div>OKeefe, Kueter</div><div>Elected Officials</div><div>J.Inhofe ... (treetops)</div><div>Public</div><div>Heartland</div><div>grassroots</div><div>supporters</div><div>Heartland</div><div>Joseph,Carol Bast</div><div>ExxonMobil F</div><div>or corporate</div><div>A small subset of</div><div>known connects.</div><div>[MAS2010,</div><div>MAS2010a]</div><div>Memes, PR</div><div>Early Seitz</div><div>Known $</div><div>Likely $</div><div>Funny $ to CSDCGC/</div><div>Ferguson</div><div>Phlip Morris</div><div>Roy Marden</div><div>Koch, Koch,</div><div>Lambe</div><div>L&H Bradley Scaife</div><div>SSF, Carthage</div><div>Other F's in various</div><div>groups with those shown</div><div>Searle, Seid, Triad, etc</div><div>SEPP</div><div>F. Singer</div><div>CSCDGC</div><div>Craig Idso</div><div>SPPI</div><div>R. Ferguson</div><div>CATO</div><div>Pat Michaels</div><div>CEI</div><div>Myron Ebell</div><div>Chris Horner</div><div>Marlo Lewis</div><div>Iain Murray</div><div>NCPA</div><div>Sterling</div><div>Burnett</div><div>NCPPR</div><div>Bonner Cohen</div><div>D&A Ridenour</div><div>TASSC</div><div>junkscience</div><div>Steve Milloy</div><div>E&CN Jay Lehr</div><div>James M. Taylor ...</div><div>Legislator's Guide</div><div>NIPCC reports</div><div>Skeptics Handbook</div><div>CFACT</div><div>Paul</div><div>Driessen</div><div>Schools</div><div>Bob Carter</div><div>Pacific, AU. NZ, IN?</div><div>AU: IPA?</div><div>David Evans, Jo Nova</div><div>IN: Liberty Institute?</div><div>Barun S. Mitra?</div><div>EM F</div><div>Scaife</div><div>Bradley</div><div>Kochs</div><div>PM</div><div>ICCCs (many)</div><div>Other</div><div>think</div><div>tanks</div><div>NAS</div><div>Peter Wood</div><div>National Association of</div><div>Scholars - members,</div><div>readers of CHE</div><div>Michael Crichton</div><div>State of Fear</div><div>? ?</div><div>Philanthropy Roundtable</div><div>API DONORS</div><div>OH-AIPG</div><div>J. Matthew Justice</div><div>William E. Shafer</div><div>DONORS</div><div>Whitney Ball</div><div>CA</div><div>FCPP</div><div>NRSP</div><div>T. Harris</div><div>NZ</div><div>NZCSC</div><div>O. McShane</div><div>ICSC</div><div>T. Dunleavy</div><div>AdTI</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>4</div><div>A 2-page sampler of E&CN</div><div>Following 2 pages are a small sample, taken</div><div>from those recorded in §Z, sent ~monthly.</div><div>Z.2001.06-1a GLOBAL TEMPERATURES</div><div>Is this global warming?</div><div>Even Spencer and Christy’s stillerroneous</div><div>work showed warming</div><div>trends. Misleading satellite claims</div><div>pervade E&CN. §Y.1</div><div>Z.2001.06-18 Jay Lehr</div><div>The real story behind Europe’s support of</div><div>Kyoto</div><div>‘It was never about science. It was always</div><div>about bringing the U.S. to its knees’</div><div>Z.2001.12-17 Fred Singer SEPP</div><div>Who needs higher energy taxes?</div><div>“What are some of the common features of the</div><div>Global Warming scare and other widely spread</div><div>popular beliefs, like astrology, UFOlogy,…</div><div>Z.2002.03-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>New studies throw cold water on warming</div><div>theory</div><div>Z.2002.03-7 Patrick Michaels CATO</div><div>Skeptical Environmentalist savaged,</div><div>vindicated</div><div>Z.2002.08-4 S. Fred S. Singer SEPP</div><div>Americans believe in global warming ...</div><div>“and psychic powers, astrology, and UFOs”</div><div>Z.2003.05-10 Jay Lehr and Richard S. Bennett</div><div>A Climate Change Primer: It’s the Sun!</div><div>Z.2003.09-16 S. Fred Singer SEPP</div><div>Alarmists’ Claims Defy Global Warming</div><div>Science</div><div>Z.2003.10-4 James M. Inhofe (via Taylor)</div><div>Senator Refutes Global Warming</div><div>Hypothesis Part 1</div><div>Z.2004.01-20 Heartland full page ad</div><div>Global Warming Fact, Myth, or Scare</div><div>Tactic?</div><div>Z.2004.03-10 Book review by Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Sound Science for the [Overly] Concerned</div><div>Public</div><div>Z.2004.05-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Health Threat of Mercury Overblown,</div><div>Scientists Say</div><div>Z.2004.06-10 Amy Ridenour NCPPR</div><div>AP Fumbles Global Warming Story</div><div>Z.2004.08-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Fear of Mercury “Hot Spots” Unfounded</div><div>Z.2004.08-3a Steve Milloy TASSC, Junkscience</div><div>Global Warming Extremists Use</div><div>Shareholder Actions to Pressure</div><div>Corporations</div><div>Z.2004.10-6 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>National Geographic Promotes Global</div><div>Warming Myths</div><div>Z.2004.10-7 Patrick J. Michaels, S. Fred Singer,</div><div>& David H. Douglass</div><div>Global Warming Computer Models</div><div>Seriously Flawed, Studies Show</div><div>Z.2005.02-1 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Crichton Strikes Devastating Blow to</div><div>Alarmists See §Y.2</div><div>“Top-selling novel contains hard science exposing</div><div>the folly of global warming alarmism.”</div><div>Z.2005.04-9 Steve McIntyre</div><div>Climate Alarmists Playing Shell</div><div>game with Data</div><div>Z.2005.04-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>Science Verifies Crichton’s State of Fear</div><div>Assertions</div><div>Z.2005.05 -12 Roy Spencer GMI</div><div>Left-Leaning Donors Skewing Climate</div><div>Change Research</div><div>2005.07 -9 Sallie Baliunas GMI</div><div>Recent Global Warmth Is Natural, Benefits</div><div>Humans</div><div>2005.08-19 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Crichton is RIGHT ~20 occurrences.</div><div>See §Y.2</div><div>Z.2005.11 -10 James M. Taylor</div><div>Mars Is Warming, NASA Scientists Report</div><div>Z.2005.12 -9a James Hoare</div><div>Mercury in Fish Not Dangerous, Study</div><div>Shows</div><div>Z.2006.05-6 Heartland quarter-page</div><div>advertisement</div><div>Smoker’s Lounge</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>5</div><div>Z.2006.06-10 Marlo Lewis CEI</div><div>Time’s Climate Change Issue Rife with</div><div>Deception</div><div>Z.2006.08-16 Joseph Bast</div><div>Gore Movie Is Gorgeous Propaganda,</div><div>Misrepresentation</div><div>Z.2006.10-11 Patrick J. Michaels CATO</div><div>Drought Scare Goes Up in Smoke</div><div>Z.2006.10-13 H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. NCPA</div><div>Congressional Hearings Break ‘Hockey</div><div>Stick’</div><div>Z.2006.10 -14 S. Fred Singer SEPP</div><div>Earth’s Climate Is Always Warming or</div><div>Cooling</div><div>Z.2007.02.8 Heartland on Monckton Letter</div><div>British Lord Demands End to Climate</div><div>Science Censorship</div><div>Z.2007.02-13 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Princeton President Caving in to Global</div><div>Warming Junk Science</div><div>Z.2007.03 -10 Patrick J. Michaels CATO</div><div>What Explains the Increasing Fury of</div><div>Global Warming Alarmists?</div><div>Z.2007.04 -6 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Heartland President Debunks Global</div><div>Warming Myths</div><div>Z.2007.06-6a Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>When Will We Tire of the Fear Mongers?</div><div>Z.2007.09 -4 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Concerned about Climate Change?</div><div>James Taylor says</div><div>there’s no cause for alarm!</div><div>Z.2007.10-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Alaska Teachers Indoctrinated with</div><div>Misleading Global Warming Materials</div><div>Z.2007.11 -10 Alan Caruba</div><div>The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died</div><div>Z.2008.02-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Arctic Sea Ice Expanding at Record Pace</div><div>Z.2008.05- 13 Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Is Your Child Being Educated</div><div>or Indoctrinated?</div><div>Z.2008.07-8 Jerome Arnett, Jr., M.D.</div><div>Best Available Scientific</div><div>Evidence Shows</div><div>Secondhand Smoke Is No</div><div>Danger</div><div>Z.2009.08-1b H. Sterling Burnett NCPA</div><div>Waxman-Markey Bill Will Raise Electricity</div><div>Prices $846 Billion</div><div>Z.2009.08-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Tell Your Congressman that GLOBAL</div><div>WARMING IS NOT A CRISIS!</div><div>Z.2009.08-4 Dan Miller</div><div>Scientists, Economists Challenge</div><div>Alarmism at Climate Conference</div><div>‘”The highly placed conspirators</div><div>who seek to ride the climate scare</div><div>to world domination have</div><div>reckoned without one thing. You. You are</div><div>here, and you will not let the truth go.” LORD</div><div>CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON</div><div>Z.2009.08-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>School Board Prez Censors Science</div><div>Z.2009.10-16</div><div>Scientists Urge Congress to Reject</div><div>Alarmism</div><div>Z.2009.10-17 David Evans</div><div>Alarmists Abandon Air Temps, But Oceans</div><div>Also Show Cooling</div><div>Z.2010.09-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Wuebbles Brings More Bias to IPCC Panel</div><div>Z.2010.10-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>IPCC Coordinating Author Gary Yohe Not</div><div>Objective</div><div>Z.2010.11.18 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Climate of Corruption Exposed</div><div>Z.2011.02-17 S. Fred Singer SEPP</div><div>Secondhand Smoke, Lung Cancer, and the</div><div>Global Warming Debate</div><div>Z.2012.01-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Nova’s Chart Shows Climate Alarmism</div><div>Funding</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>6</div><div>0. Front Matter</div><div>0.1 Advice on reading this report</div><div>The background is complex, in part due to dynamic, sometimes hidden</div><div>relationships and obscured money flows. Readers unused to studying</div><div>financial reports should avoid those sections, especially §A, §H, §K.1, as</div><div>their eyes will glaze quickly. It is very hard to make those simple.</div><div>? Skim Front Matter for background, mostly to see the Topics for later</div><div>reference. Readers unused to non-profits and may spend some time</div><div>learning about 501(c) organizations, §0.4 and see the IRS-?? codes</div><div>used to tag alleged violations of 501(c)(3) rules. §0.5 lists common,</div><div>long-debunked climate science arguments, tagged Meme-nn.</div><div>? Read the short narrative §1-§6 and then check some long Appendices</div><div>as needed in case of questions on the alleged abuses of charity status.</div><div>? Appendix §W analyzes 1700+ pages of Heartland’s Environment and</div><div>Climate Newsletter (E&CN). This exposes patterns that I allege</div><div>pervasively violate charity rules. §X gives a chronology of the most</div><div>active authors and short biographies for many. §Y explains the</div><div>deceptions of E&CN’s continual misuse of satellite data, and the</div><div>problems with E&CN’s Crichton campaign. §Z is ~100 pages of</div><div>excerpts plus annotations from 86 issues of E&CN. The reader might</div><div>skim some of that, and perhaps even read a few E&CN issues.</div><div>Layout tries to balance convenience between paper-only and on-line</div><div>readers. The latter might use 2 PDF windows, one for main narrative</div><div>Acrobat Full Reader Search is suggested to find all mentions of terms.</div><div>Wikis are not claimed as authoritative, but as useful introductions and</div><div>sources of references to avoid citation explosions. Italicized text here</div><div>shows opinion. Emboldening in quotations is usually the author’s. For</div><div>brevity, titles and given names are usually omitted, no disrespect intended.</div><div>ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS</div><div>DeSmogBlog and Sourcewatch and have been very helpful. I thank Ted</div><div>Kirkpatrick and other reviewers for plowing through this dense report and</div><div>making many helpful comments. Thanks to Brian Schmidt for some good</div><div>501(c)(3) and E&CN pointers, and to Robert Brulle for alerting me to some</div><div>important 990s and the FC search engine. I again thank my wife for</div><div>putting up with my writing a third long report in 2 years. See also</div><div>Acknowledgements in [MAS2010, p.35], as this is built atop much else.</div><div>0.2 Key references and further reading</div><div>Most people and organizations mentioned here appear in various books,</div><div>recommended reading, and some of my earlier reports:</div><div>BRA2007 Allan M. Brandt , The Cigarette Century,1</div><div>BRA2012 Allan M. Brandt, Inventing Conflicts of Interest: A History</div><div>of Tobacco Industry Tactics2</div><div>,</div><div>DUN2011 Riley Dunlap, Aaron McCright, “Organized Climate Denial”3</div><div>HOG2009 James Hoggan, Climate Cover-Up</div><div>MAN2012 Michael Mann, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars</div><div>MAS2008 Another Attack on Global Warming’s Scientific Consensus4</div><div>MAS2009 Science Bypass - Anti-science Petition to APS5</div><div>MAS2010 Crescendo to Climategate Cacophony6</div><div>MAS2010a Strange Scholarship in the Wegman Report7</div><div>MAS2011f Weird Anti-Science – Donna Bethell, SEPP & Sandia…8</div><div>MCC2011 Aaron M. McCright, Riley E. Dunlap, “Cool Dudes…”</div><div>9</div><div>MOO2005 Chris Mooney, The Republican War on Science</div><div>ORE2010 Naomi Oreskes, Erik Conway, Merchants of Doubt,</div><div>10</div><div>PRO1995 Robert N. Proctor, Cancer Wars</div><div>PRO2012 Robert N. Proctor, Golden Holocaust</div><div>
</div><div>1 www.cigarettecentury.com</div><div>2 Am J of Public Health, Jan. 2012</div><div>ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300292</div><div>3</div><div>In John Dryzek, Richard Norgaard, David Schlosberg, Eds. The Oxford</div><div>Handbook of Climate Change and Society , 2011, pp.144-160.</div><div>4 www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-journal-publishes-plagiarized-paper</div><div>5 www.desmogblog.com/another-silly-climate-petition-exposed</div><div>6 www.desmogblog.com/crescendo-climategate-cacophony</div><div>7</div><div>deepclimate.org/2010/09/26/strange-scholarship-wegman-report</div><div>8 www.desmogblog.com/weird-anti-science-donna-bethell-sepp-and-sandianational-laboratories</div><div>9 McCright, A.M., Dunlap, R.E., Cool dudes: The denial of climate change among</div><div>conservative white males in the United States. Global Environ. Change (2011),</div><div>doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.06</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/what-s-conservative-white-men-and-climate-change-denial</div><div>sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_4800/mccright_dunlap_2011.pdf</div><div>10 www.merchantsofdoubt.org Highlighted cigarette – climate commonality.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>7</div><div>0.3 Glossary</div><div>This section omits recipients of money, mostly think tanks, listed in §0.6.</div><div>501(c) US non-profit organizations</div><div>11</div><div> Read §0.4 if unfamiliar.</div><div>501(c)(3) Some are Private foundations set up to donate money to</div><div>qualified recipients. Public charities form the second group,</div><div>also tax-exempt entities performing activities in the public</div><div>interest. Their donors get charitable deductions. They must</div><div>report and limit lobbying, and must follow various rules to keep</div><div>tax-exempt status. Most think tanks are “public charities,”</div><div>acting in public interest, but some are dubious.</div><div>501(c)(4) Tax-free, but contributions not deductible, can lobby more.</div><div>Sometimes (c)(3) and (c)(4) share same people and office,</div><div>which might be reasonable, or might allow abuse.</div><div>990 501(c) organizations must file this IRS Form every year.</div><div>Forms are public, except for lists of donors filed with IRS.</div><div>990-PF Private foundations file this version, which lists recipients.</div><div>AAAS American Association for the Advancement of Science12</div><div>AGU American Geophysical Union13 (geosciences)</div><div>AGW Anthropogenic (human-caused) Global Warming</div><div>API American Petroleum Institute,</div><div>14 501(c)6 (industry assoc)</div><div>APS American Physical Society15 (physicists)</div><div>Astroturf (political) efforts that look like grass(roots), but are fakes</div><div>
</div><div>11 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501%28c%29_organization</div><div>To find data on these, use one or more of the following, each with tradeoffs:</div><div>www.eri-nonprofit-salaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Search</div><div>foundationcenter.org/findfunders/990finder</div><div>www2.guidestar.org</div><div>fconline.foundationcenter.org (search engine, requires subscription, but if the</div><div>reader wants to find the funders of a charity, it really helps.)</div><div>12 www.aaas.org Large science organization, of which author is member, along</div><div>with AGU and APS. Despite “American” titles, these are international.</div><div>13 www.agu.org Large science society, meets every December in San Francisco</div><div>(21,000 attendees, including the author.)</div><div>14 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute</div><div>15 www.aps.org; www.desmogblog.com/another-silly-climate-petition-exposed</div><div>Like AAAS and AGU, APS is a professional society. Such groups seem</div><div>appropriate for 501(c)(3) status.</div><div>CAGW Catastrophic AGW, strawman term generally not used by</div><div>climate researchers, but used by others to conflate mainstream</div><div>science with doom saying.</div><div>CTR Council on Tobacco Research, see [PRO2012]</div><div>E&CN Heartland Environment and Climate News, §W</div><div>E&E Energy and Environment, not a credible journal on climate16</div><div>Fakexpert fake expert, preferably with PhD, maybe other vague titles</div><div>GCC Global Climate Coalition, now defunct</div><div>GCSCT Global Climate Science Communications Team (API, 1998)17</div><div>GMU George Mason University, 18</div><div>Grassroots-treetops combined lobbying (treetops) and wider (grassroots)</div><div>political efforts. The grass is often astroturf.</div><div>Grasstops friends of influential people [PRO2012, p685]</div><div>IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</div><div>Nature & Science The 2 most prestigious general science journals</div><div>MWP Medieval Warm Period</div><div>LIA Little Ice Age</div><div>LTDL Legacy Tobacco Documents Library,</div><div>19 or “tobacco archives”</div><div>NCAR National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO</div><div>OISM Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine20</div><div>NIPCC Nongovernmental IPCC, Reports by Singer for Heartland21</div><div>PDF Portable Document Format</div><div>PM Philip Morris, now part of Altria,22</div><div>RJR R.J. Reynolds, large cigarette vendor, Camels</div><div>RSS Remote Sensing Systems, company that analyzes satellite data</div><div>Think tank covers wide range of organizations,23 some not what they say</div><div>UAH University of Alabama at Huntsville (R. Spencer, J. Christy)</div><div>
</div><div>16 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy%26_Environment</div><div>17 MAS2010 pp.19-20, 82</div><div>18 www.gmu.edu</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/gmu-still-paralyzed-wegman-and-rapp-still-paranoid</div><div>19 legacy.library.ucsf.edu is a good site</div><div>20www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medic</div><div>ine</div><div>21 MAS2010 p.87, www.nipccreport.org</div><div>22 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altria</div><div>23 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_tank</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>8</div><div>0.4 501(c)(3) non-profits, IRS-?? tags</div><div>Many sources discuss 501(c)(3) status.</div><div>2425 262728 29</div><div>“Private foundations” are funded by organizations (such as ExxonMobil)</div><div>individuals (such as Richard Mellon Scaife) or families (Koch brothers).</div><div>They must follow various rules, such as no lobbying and they donate to</div><div>501(c)(3) “public charities” that must obey other rules:</div><div>IRS-?? Tags summarized</div><div>IRS-?? IRS-related issues for charity status.</div><div>IRS-0E is a simple umbrella code for combinations of education</div><div>violations, IRS-1E - IRS-4E.</div><div>IRS-0E Not a sufficiently full and fair exposition (not Education) -</div><div>not information, but misinformation or disinformation.</div><div>This is often done by omission of crucial information.</div><div>IRS-1E Viewpoint unsupported by facts is significant part</div><div>IRS-2E Facts are distorted</div><div>IRS-3E Substantial use of inflammatory and disparaging terms</div><div>“Alarmist” was so pervasive it was not tagged, §W.3.</div><div>IRS-4E Not aimed to create understanding, ignores background</div><div>IRS-5L Behavior seems like Lobbying, but 990 says none</div><div>IRS-6G Governance needs to be active, engaged, independent</div><div>IRS-7F Possible Financial abuses, self-dealing, tax-shelters, flows(?)</div><div>IRS-8P Possible issues with Public Support percentages</div><div>IRS-9M Miscellaneous, such as perjury</div><div>IRS-10F Possible Foreign financial grant issues, not exempt</div><div>A PDF reader’s full search for “IRS-“ shows all the instances (about 200)</div><div>in context. Some are obvious, some are marginal.</div><div>In most cases, any Meme, §0.5, via a charity (SEPP, Heartland, etc) is also</div><div>evidence of problems: IRS-1E, IRS-2E, IRS-4E.</div><div>
</div><div>24 www.grantspace.org/Tools/Knowledge-Base/FundingResources/Foundations/Private-foundations-vs-public-charities</div><div>25 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation%28USA%29</div><div>26 nccsdataweb.urban.org/nccsTools.php; www.npccny.org/Form_990/990.htm</div><div>27 nccsdataweb.urban.org/PubApps/nonprofit-overview-segment.php?t=pc</div><div>28 www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163392,00.html</div><div>29 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_America_non-profit_laws</div><div>Via free speech, people can lie as much as they want in many</div><div>circumstances, but if a charity lies about science too much, it might just</div><div>cause lead to revocation of that status, when then causes trouble for private</div><div>foundations that fund it. Following are the problematic issues according to</div><div>the IRS:</div><div>Educational Purpose IRS-0E</div><div>It is possible30 for a 501(c)(3) to lose its exemption if its advocacy of a</div><div>particular viewpoint is not considered educational.31</div><div>“Under this regulation, an organization may be educational even though it</div><div>advocates a particular position or viewpoint, so long as it presents a sufficiently</div><div>full and fair exposition of the pertinent facts as to permit an individual or the</div><div>public to form an independent opinion or conclusion. On the other hand, an</div><div>organization is not educational if its principal function is the mere presentation</div><div>of unsupported opinion. … IRS-0E</div><div>SEC. 3. CRITERIA USED TO DETERMINE WHETHER ADVOCACY BY</div><div>AN ORGANIZATION IS EDUCATIONAL …</div><div>.03 The presence of any of the following factors in the presentations made by</div><div>an organization is indicative that the method used by the organization to</div><div>advocate its viewpoints or positions is not educational.</div><div>1 The presentation of viewpoints or positions unsupported by facts is a</div><div>significant portion of the organization's communications. IRS-1E</div><div>2 The facts that purport to support the viewpoints or positions are distorted.</div><div>32</div><div>IRS-2E</div><div>3 The organization's presentations make substantial use of inflammatory and</div><div>disparaging terms and express conclusions more on the basis of strong</div><div>emotional feelings than of objective evaluations33</div><div>. IRS-3E</div><div>4 The approach used in the organization's presentations is not aimed at</div><div>developing an understanding on the part of the intended audience or readership</div><div>because it does not consider their background or training in the subject</div><div>matter.” IRS-4E</div><div>
</div><div>30 openjurist.org/710/f2d/868/national-alliance-v-united-states-national-alliance</div><div>31 www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/rp_1986-43.pdf, Rev. Proc. 86-43, 1986-2 C.B. 729</div><div>32 §Y offers two of the most pervasive examples in E&CN, untruthful use of</div><div>satellite data computations and continual promotion of Michael Crichton’s antiscience</div><div>claims.</div><div>33 Heartland has many, such as 880 cases of “alarmist” or “alarmism,” §W.3.</div><div>That is more than 10/issue on average.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>9</div><div>Lobbying IRS-5L</div><div>A 501(c)(3) public charity can lobby as long as long as that does not make</div><div>up a “substantial part” of their activities.34</div><div>
</div><div>Both SEPP and Heartland claim zero lobbying, although Heartland has</div><div>often touted its abilities to reach legislators and change their minds.</div><div>Governance35</div><div> IRS-6G</div><div>“The Internal Revenue Service encourages an active and engaged board36</div><div>believing that it is important to the success of a charity and to its compliance</div><div>with applicable tax law requirements. Governing boards should be composed of</div><div>persons who are informed and active in overseeing a charity’s operations and</div><div>finances. …</div><div>Irrespective of size, a governing board should include independent members and</div><div>should not be dominated by employees or others who are not, by their very</div><div>nature, independent individuals because of family37 or business relationships.</div><div>The Internal Revenue Service reviews the board composition of charities to</div><div>determine whether the board represents a broad public interest, and to identify</div><div>the potential for insider transactions that could result in misuse of charitable</div><div>assets. The Internal Revenue Service also reviews whether an organization has</div><div>independent members, stockholders, or other persons with the authority to elect</div><div>members of the board or approve or reject board decisions ...</div><div>The public expects a charity to abide by ethical standards that promote the public</div><div>good. The organization’s governing body bears the ultimate responsibility for</div><div>setting ethical standards and ensuring they permeate the organization and inform</div><div>its practices.”</div><div>Abusive Tax Avoidance Transactions (ATATs),38 Self-Dealing, 39</div><div>Unlike some issues that clearly violate IRS rules, 990s only hint at these,</div><div>so confirmation would require IRS investigation of data not publicly</div><div>available. This category includes tax-shelters and some money transfers</div><div>that were taxable, but not reported as such. IRS-7F</div><div>
</div><div>34 www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163394,00.html</div><div>35 www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/governance_practices.pdf</div><div>36 For example, the Chairman should be alive.</div><div>37 Family businesses are fine, but 501(c)(3) is a privilege, needs good governance.</div><div>38 www.nonprofitexpert.com/IRS/IRS1.htm</div><div>39 www.npccny.org/Form_990/Exp_Self-Dealing.htm</div><div>Public Support IRS-8P</div><div>The IRS rules are nontrivial,40</div><div> but 501(c)(3) public charity status requires</div><div>the entity to show reasonable support from a broader public, not just a few</div><div>large donors. A simple explanation is given below:</div><div>“Under US tax law, a 501(c)(3) public charity must maintain a certain</div><div>percentage of "public support". As with most tax rules, this one is complicated.</div><div>If, over a four-year period, any one individual donates more than 2% of the</div><div>organization's total support, anything over 2% does not count as "public</div><div>support". If a single donor supported a charity, its public support percentage</div><div>would be only 2%. If two donors supported a charity, its public support</div><div>percentage would be at most 4%. Public charities must maintain a public support</div><div>percentage of at least 10% and preferably 33.3%. Small donations - donations of</div><div>less than 2% of our total support over a four-year period - count entirely as</div><div>public support. Small donations permit us to accept more donations from our</div><div>major supporters without sending our percentage of public support into the</div><div>critical zone.”41</div><div>Thus, charities campaign vigorously for smaller donations.</div><div>Also, it might be advantageous for large donors to send money through</div><div>several intermediates, since a 10% donation would only count as 2%, but 5</div><div>2% donations would total 10%. For instance, DeSmogBlog reports the</div><div>obscure funding of Heartland 2009 climate conference.42</div><div>Finally, the large family foundations often spread their support across</div><div>many donees, as it is better for each recipient to get 5x10% donations</div><div>(worth 10% total) than a single 50% donation (worth 2%).</div><div>If a 501(c)(3) falls below 33.3%, the IRS starts examining it much more</div><div>closely, following a complex set of rules.</div><div>SEPP 990s show high public support and sometimes high capital gains.</div><div>As in IRS-07, the IRS might find something via non-public data.</div><div>
</div><div>40 www.irs.gov/irm/part4/irm_04-076-003.html</div><div>www.irs.gov/publications/p557/ch03.html</div><div>www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i990sa.pdf</div><div>41 singinst.org/donate/whysmalldonationsmatter</div><div>42 www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institutes-2009-climate-conference-new-yorkfunding-history-sponsors</div><div>
</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/1</div><div>4/12</div><div>10</div><div>Grants to foreign groups43</div><div> IRS-10F</div><div>GuideStar offers: 44 “A public charity will not jeopardize its tax exemption by distributing funds</div><div>to organizations that are not charities. The charity must, however, ensure the</div><div>use of the funds for permitted purposes by limiting distributions to specific</div><div>projects that further the charity's own purposes. The charity must retain</div><div>discretion and control as to the use of the funds and maintain records showing</div><div>that the funds were used for its exempt purposes. This is the case regardless of</div><div>where the funds are spent.”</div><div>This has useful cases: 45</div><div>“Assuming that a U.S. organization solicits and receives funds for its own</div><div>exempt purposes, and is able to exercise discretion and control over the funds,</div><div>then the U.S. organization may choose to further its exempt purposes by making</div><div>gifts and grants to foreign organizations. However, the U.S. organization may</div><div>also be subject to special rules depending upon whether the foreign organization</div><div>has a determination letter from the Internal Revenue Service (recognizing the</div><div>organization’s tax exempt status). …</div><div>On the other hand, if the foreign organization does not hold a determination</div><div>letter from the IRS, then the grantor organization would have additional</div><div>recordkeeping requirements. A public charity would bear the burden of</div><div>showing that the grant was made to the foreign organization to further one</div><div>of the charity’s exempt activities and was used for its intended purposes</div><div>.</div><div>The IRS has: 46 “A charity’s 501(c)(3) status can be revoked if the charity makes grants to</div><div>foreign organizations or individuals and it cannot demonstrate that the</div><div>grants were actually used for exempt purposes.</div><div>…If for any reason there is a</div><div>diversion of grant funds for improper purposes, or for purposes inconsistent with</div><div>the grant agreement, a charitable organization must take corrective action</div><div>.</div><div>”</div><div>In 2007, with no previous history of foreign grants, Heartland started</div><div>making some, of which many seem quite dubious, Fig. H.3.1.</div><div>
</div><div>43 www.usig.org</div><div>44 www2.guidestar.org/rxa/news/articles/2007/international</div><div>-giving</div><div>-by</div><div>-public</div><div>-</div><div>charities.aspx?articleId=1123</div><div>45 www.whdlaw.com/ArticleDetail.aspx?ID=790</div><div>46 www2.guidestar.org/rxa/news/articles/2007/international</div><div>-giving</div><div>-by</div><div>-public</div><div>-</div><div>charities.aspx?articleId=1123</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>11</div><div>0.5 Memes</div><div>Climate anti-science documents repeatedly proclaim the same longdebunked</div><div>arguments (“Memes”) When analyzing them, proper debunking</div><div>may need 10X more text than the original. It is far easier to encode the</div><div>commonly-used cases and just reference them. 47</div><div>Fred Singer, Heartland and allies reiterate many well-cataloged antiscience</div><div>Memes. Such memes may not be obvious to the reader unfamiliar</div><div>with climate anti-science, but experienced students48 of this topic recognize</div><div>them quickly. Sometimes a short OpEd or article consists of little else.49</div><div>Skeptical Science(SkS)50 offers a convenient numbered list of climate antiscience</div><div>arguments. Each has a short phrase linked to a general-audience</div><div>description and debunking. Peer-reviewed literature is cited as backup.</div><div>Bold *’d items were used by Michael Crichton, §Y.2.</div><div>Crichton obviously did not learn them from mainstream scientists.51</div><div>Meme-01 “It's the sun”</div><div>Meme-02 “Climate’s changed before”</div><div>Meme-03 “There is no consensus”</div><div>Meme-04 “It's cooling”</div><div>Meme-05* “Models are unreliable”</div><div>Meme-06 “Temp record is unreliable”</div><div>Meme-07 “It hasn't warmed since 1998”</div><div>Meme-10* “Antarctica is gaining ice”</div><div>Meme-11 “CO2 lags temperature”</div><div>Meme-13 “Al Gore got it wrong”</div><div>Meme-14 “It’s cosmic rays”</div><div>Meme-15 “It’s freaking cold”</div><div>Meme-18 “Hockey-stick is broken”</div><div>Meme-19 “Mars is warming”</div><div>Meme-20* “It's Urban Heat Island effect”</div><div>
</div><div>47 MAS2010a, p.10.</div><div>48 One need not be a climate scientist to recognize bad arguments.</div><div>49</div><div>. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish Gish Gallop analog</div><div>50 www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php</div><div>51 In which case, how did he acquire these ideas? No one who seriously studies the</div><div>science or talks to real climate scientists would believe this.</div><div>Meme-21 “It’s a 1500 year cycle”</div><div>Meme-23* “Sea level rise is exaggerated”</div><div>Meme-26 “Greenland was green”</div><div>Meme-29* “Human CO2 is a tiny % of CO2 emissions”</div><div>Meme-31 “Increasing CO2 has little to no effect”</div><div>Meme-32 “We’re coming out of the Little Ice Age”</div><div>Meme-34 “1934 - hottest year on record”</div><div>Meme-35* “It warmed before 1940 when CO2 was low”</div><div>Meme-36 “There's no empirical evidence”</div><div>Meme-37 “Polar bear numbers are increasing”</div><div>Meme-38* “Satellites show no warming in the troposphere”</div><div>Almost every E&CN issue claims this at least once, §Y.1.</div><div>(Via Spencer, Christy, Singer.)</div><div>Meme-41 “Extreme weather isn't caused by global warming”</div><div>Meme-48 “Neptune is warming”</div><div>Meme-49 “Jupiter is warming”</div><div>Meme-52 “Pluto is warming”</div><div>Meme-56 “Medieval Warm Period was warmer”</div><div>Meme-60 “Arctic sea ice has recovered”</div><div>Meme-69 “Humans are too insignificant to affect global climate”</div><div>Meme-70 “It's not happening”</div><div>Meme-72* “It's land use”</div><div>Meme-89* “Hansen’s 1998 prediction was wrong”</div><div>Meme-94 “Over 31,000 scientists signed the OISM Petition Project”</div><div>Meme-120* “CO2 is plant food” (especially via the Idso family)</div><div>Meme-136 “It's a natural cycle”</div><div>Meme-146 “Skeptics were kept out of the IPCC”</div><div>Meme-151 “We’re heading into cooling”</div><div>Meme-175 “CO2 limits will hurt the poor”</div><div>Meme-182 “Sea level is not rising”</div><div>Meme-186 “Roy Spencer finds negative feedback”</div><div>As described in §W, I collected 1723 pages of E&CN, excerpted an</div><div>informative subset of articles and annotated some in detail. I inserted</div><div>Meme and IRS tags, with no claim of comprehensive coverage, as it is just</div><div>too repetitive. The reader can use PDF Full Search to see any in context.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>12</div><div>0.6 Recipient glossary and top funders</div><div>These started with the Philip Morris list, Fig. F.4 , then added a few more:</div><div>m described in [MAS2010]</div><div>x 501(c)x, usually x is 3, sometimes 4 or 6</div><div>State is shown: 32 of 50 are in DC (17), VA (13) and MD(2)52</div><div>P Fig. F.5 shows what they did for Philip Morris</div><div>* Philip Morris relationship managed by Roy Marden</div><div>Year $M shows approximate contributions from last available year, ~2009.</div><div>Some have not filed recently and seem to be going defunct. It seems they</div><div>could be funded for several years before losing charity status, a loophole?</div><div>U Penn’s list of top think tanks appeared recently. 53 Heartland is not there.</div><div>
</div><div>52maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=107940825189517</div><div>771981.0004815492d08b0c445f9&ll=38.882481,-</div><div>76.978455&spn=0.771829,1.253815&z=10 Map of think tanks.</div><div>[MAS2010] located many of these, whose densest concentration is near</div><div>Washington, DC’s famous “K Street,” convenient for lobbying.</div><div>53 www.gotothinktank.com/2011-global-tank-index</div><div>The 48 charities54 received ~$330M. A few are large. Many are smaller,</div><div>belonging to “policyneurs,” people who effectively run small policy</div><div>advocacy businesses. They seek funds from those who will pay, many</div><div>including tobacco companies and other corporations, in addition to the</div><div>foundations who supply the core funding. Some staff members seem to</div><div>have spent their careers moving among such think tanks.</div><div>T Tobacco funding, from Fig. F.4 or Sourcewatch. T* see Fig. F.5.</div><div>t: funding earlier (as in Seitz at Rockefeller) or Singer via AdTI</div><div>42 of 50 have had tobacco connections, most known via LTDL</div><div>E ExxonMobil funding</div><div>K Kochs (Charles, David, or Claude Lambe Foundations)</div><div>B Lynde and Harry (L&H) Bradley Foundation</div><div>S Richard Mellon Scaife (Sarah Scaife Foundation, Carthage, etc)</div><div>D DONORS TRUST or CAPITAL, run by Whitney Ball</div><div>
</div><div>54 NAM is a 501(c)(6), not counted. SPPI is not a 501(c)(3), not counted. 501(c)(X) Recipient Glossary Year Known donors 501(c)(X) Recipient Glossary Yearly Known donors</div><div>m X Code EIN Name (GMU-related underlined) P * $M T E K B S D X Code EIN Name (GMU-related underlined) P * $M T E K B S D</div><div>3 MI Acton 382926822 Acton Institute for Study of Religion&Liberty P * 5.9 T E K B S D m 3 IL Heartland 363309812 Heartland Institute P * 6.5 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3 NH AdTI 942978968 Alexis de Tocqueville Institute, 2007 P * - T B m 3 DC Heritage 237327730 Heritage Foundation P * 72.0 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3 DC AEI 530218495 American Enterprise Inst P * 47.3 T E K B S D m 3 DC Hudson 131945157 Hudson Institute P * 9.1 T E K B S D</div><div>3 DC AFP 521527294 Americans for Prosperity Foundation 7.5 T K B S D 3 DC IndWom 541670627 Independent Women's Forum P 4.1 T K B S</div><div>m 3 DC ALEC 520140979 American Legislative Exchange Council P 5.6 T E B S D m 3 VA InstHumn 94623852 (IHS) Institute for Humane Studies (GMU) 6.1 K B S D</div><div>3 VA AmPolFnd 541543323 American Policy Foundation, 2007 P - T 3 VA InstJust 521744337 Institute for Justice P 15.7 T B S D</div><div>m 3 MD AnnapCtr 521759134 Annapolis Center for Science Based Pub Pol,2007 - T E 3 MI Mackinac 382701547 Mackinac Center for Public Policy P 3.2 T K B D</div><div>3 VA ASF 237002632 American Spectator Foundation P 1.7 T B D m 3 NY Manhattan 132912529 Manhattan Institute P * 11.9 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3 DC ATLAS 942763845 Atlas Economic Research Foundation P * 5.4 T E K B S D m 3 VA Mercatus 541436224 Mercatus Ctr (GMU) 7.8 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3,4 DC ATR 521400492 Americans for Tax Reform F P * 0.9 T K B S 3 VA MRC 541429009 Media Research Center (new for me, big!) 10.6 E B S D</div><div>3 DC CapResCtr 52128973 Capital Research Center * 1.2 T E K B S D 6 DC NAM 131084330 National Assoc, Manufacturers P * 28.7 T</div><div>3 OR Cascade 931045925 Cascade Policy Institute 1.0 T B D 3 NJ NAS 112741490 National Association of Scholars 0.7 B S</div><div>m 3 DC CATO 237432162 CATO Institute P 19.0 T E K B S D m 3 TX NCPA 751804932 National Center for Policy Analysis P * 4.1 T E K B S D</div><div>3 DC CEI 521351785 Competitive Enterprise Institute P * 4.6 T E K B S D m 3 DC NCPPR 521226614 National Center for Public Policy Research P * 8.6 T E S D</div><div>3 VA CFACT 521462893 Committee for Constructive Tomorrow 1.5 E S D m 3 OR OISM 930814898 Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine 0.5</div><div>3 CA Claremont 953443202 Claremont Institute for Study of States. Pol. P * 3.0 T B S D m 3 CA PLF 942197343 Pacific Legal Foundation P * 8.4 T E K B S D</div><div>3 PA Commwlth 232473845 Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alts. 0.4 K B S D m 3 CA PRI 942529433 Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy P * 4.6 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3 VA CMPA 521328708 Center Media and Public Affairs (GMU) 0.4 T B S m 3 CA Reason 953298239 Reason Foundation P * 6.1 T E K B S D</div><div>m 3 AZ CSCDGC 860902777 Center for Carbon Dioxide and Global Change 1.5 E K B S D m 3 VA SEPP 541645372 Science and Environmental Policy Project 0.1 t E</div><div>3 DC DPR 521777263 Defenders of Property Rights, 2007 P - T 3 VA StatePolN 570952531 State Policy Network * 4.3 T K B D</div><div>3 WA EFF 843138961 Evergreen Freedom Foundation (see Fig. F-5) P 2.2 T* B S D m - VA SPPI CSCDGC Science & Public Policy Institute (no 990s) - K B D</div><div>m 3,4 DC FreeWorks 521526916 Freedom Works 3.7 T E ? B S D m 3 MD TASSC 521823181 The Advance.. of Sound Science Coalition/Center P - T E</div><div>m 3,4 VA FF 542050093 (FoF) Frontiers of Freedom, 2006 P * - T E K B S m 3 CA TII 943008370 The Independent Institute 2.5 T E K</div><div>m 3 DC GMI 222569466 George Marshall Institute 0.8 t E K B S 3 TX TPPF 742524057 Texas Public Policy Foundation P 3.1 T K B D</div><div>m 3 VA GMU 541603682 George Mason University ( Law & Econ Center) P * 22.7 T E K B S D m 3 DC WLF 521071570 Washington Legal Foundation P * 3.8 T E B D</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>13</div><div>0.7 Tobacco Playbook, climate anti-science</div><div>Robert Proctor summarized tobacco doubt-creation strategies documented</div><div>in his new book [PRO2012 pp.290-291], drawn from LTDL and</div><div>elsewhere. His handy list is excerpted here. Proctor notes that tobacco</div><div>paid for much real science that was irrelevant, for the sake of confusion.</div><div>That seems to happen only rarely for climate, where the more common</div><div>tactic tries to slip bad papers past unwary editors.</div><div>(0) ‘One of the more common has been simply to assemble and reproduce</div><div>statements by authorities willing to deny the hazard. …</div><div>1. Publicize statements from scholars skeptical of the hazard. Fund the research</div><div>of these scholars to entice them to testify in court or regulatory hearings.</div><div>2. Publicize examples of people living to a ripe old age despite decades of</div><div>smoking.</div><div>3. Raise questions about “anomalies that seem paradoxical. …</div><div>4. Redefine terms, Deny there is “tar” in cigarettes and insist on using words like</div><div>biological activity or hyperplasia rather than cancer or pre-cancer.</div><div>5. Wrap yourself in the authority of science. Contrast the “rush to judgment”</div><div>approach of anti-tobacco “fanatics” with the cautious “wait and see” attitude of</div><div>the industry. Insist on laboratory proof when faced with statistical evidence,…</div><div>6. State that the evidence linking tobacco and disease is merely “statistical” and</div><div>then deride statistics as an improper method for reasoning about causality.</div><div>Finance your own epidemiology and publish this in engineering journals if</div><div>medical journals won’t take it. Then hire experts to say such studies are</div><div>“difficult to refute” and make sure such remarks get coverage in the popular</div><div>press.</div><div>7. Put a positive spin on uncomfortable facts. … body not as weak in the face of</div><div>carcinogenic onslaughts but strong in its capacity to resist such onslaughts.</div><div>8. Construct graphs and charts in such a way as to make it look like cancer trends</div><div>are chaotic (“graphic agnotology”) …</div><div>9. Hire journalists to write industry-sympathetic articles in the popular press.</div><div>10. Undermine the authority of health organizations such as the American Cancer</div><div>Society, the Surgeon General, the American Heart Association, or the National</div><div>Cancer Institute. Denigrate these as “advocacy” or “government”</div><div>organizations aligned with an anti-tobacco “cause” or “movement” (with an</div><div>“agenda,” etc.). Imply that such organizations are irremediably biased ….</div><div>11. Hire historians to rewrite history from the industry point of view and then use</div><div>such scholars as experts in court. …</div><div>12. Proclaim the smoking and health controversy to be “nothing new.”</div><div>13. Keep people smoking by reassuring them that the industry is doing everything</div><div>it can to make cigarettes as safe as possible.</div><div>14. Always keep thinking of new ways to defend the industry.’</div><div>Of course, behind the scenes, the reader finds [PRO2012 p.114]</div><div>'Herbert then reported on his interview with David Goerlitz, the jut-jawed</div><div>Winston Man model, …. Goerlitz then asked whether any of the company's</div><div>executives smoke and got this answer: “Are you kidding?</div><div>We reserve that right for the poor, the young, the black and the stupid.”’</div><div>The following adapts Proctor’s list to climate anti-science:</div><div>(0) Petitions: OISM and Singer’s numerous petitions, Open Letters,</div><div>Heartland Legislative Guide, Experts lists, NIPCC, ICCCs.</div><div>1. Publicize statements from scholars skeptical of AGW. Epidemiology left more</div><div>room for real scholars to argue, but the few who deny AGW get quoted often.</div><div>2. Publicize examples of people living to a ripe old age despite decades of</div><div>smoking. Cherry-pick dates, places cooling, glaciers growing. Ignore others.</div><div>3. Raise questions about “anomalies” that seem paradoxical. … Cold winters.</div><div>4. Redefine terms, Deny there is “tar” in cigarettes</div><div>Claim AGW is not real, for any of numerous conflicting reasons.</div><div>5. Wrap yourself in the authority of science. Contrast the “rush to judgment”</div><div>approach of climate “alarmists” or “warmists” with the cautious “wait and</div><div>see” attitude of “realists”. Insist on laboratory proof …</div><div>6. State that there is no evidence linking human activity and warming and try to</div><div>challenge basic physics of heat-trapping gases and conservation of energy.</div><div>Finance your own climate studies and publish this in Energy&Environment,</div><div>OpEds or blogs if Nature and Science won’t take it. Then hire experts to say</div><div>such studies are “difficult to refute” and make sure such remarks get coverage</div><div>in the popular press, such as Wall Street Journal OpEds.</div><div>7. Put a positive spin on uncomfortable facts. … CO2 is good for plants, warming</div><div>is good for tourism, the Earth has been warmer long ago, people adapt, etc, etc.</div><div>8. Construct graphs and charts in such a way as to make it look like temperature</div><div>trends are chaotic (“graphic agnotology”) … §Y.1 on satellites .</div><div>9. Hire journalists to write industry-sympathetic articles in the popular press. yes.</div><div>10. Undermine the authority of science organizations such as the IPCC, NASA</div><div>GISS, UK Hadley Center, climate scientists in general. Denigrate these as</div><div>“advocacy” or “government” organizations aligned with an anti-economy</div><div>“cause” or “movement” (with an “agenda,” etc.). Imply that such</div><div>organizations are irremediably biased or one-sided.</div><div>11. Hire any fakexpert to rewrite history from the industry point of view …</div><div>12. Proclaim “climate has changed before” or “warmer in MWP.”</div><div>13. Keep people using fossil fuels and avoiding even slight motion towards</div><div>efficiency or renewables by reassuring them that nothing (mercury, etc) is</div><div>harmful and air quality has improved anyway, so no more need be done.</div><div>14. Keep thinking of new ways to defend status quo, incl. fossil industry.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>14</div><div>1 Introduction</div><div>Non-profit 501(c) organizations file “Form 990” tax reports, accessible</div><div>online at various websites. While mind-numbing, careful perusal can raise</div><div>questions that might motivate Federal investigations. An exempt</div><div>501(c)(3) public charity needs to have government-approved purposes in</div><div>the public interest, often “education.” See §0.4 for a tutorial.</div><div>Singer’s most obvious 990 untruths are shown in §2.Then §3 examines</div><div>SEPP’s strange finances, seemingly ideal for ungoverned and obscure</div><div>money movements with tax sheltered investing as a bonus.</div><div>Money trails led to the Heartland Institute, §4.</div><div>IRS-relevant allegations are enumerated §5, followed by conclusions, §6.</div><div>Some oddities appear only when comparing different sets of 990s. All</div><div>claim no lobbying. There is much room for doubt about that, especially in</div><div>Heartland’s case. Evidence here indicates widespread abuse of 501(c)(3)</div><div>status by various tax-free think tanks paid for anti-science advocacy.</div><div>Appendices §A-$C cover SEPP’s financials and Singer’s long history of</div><div>anti-science activities.</div><div>§E describes a fake science organization, NIPCC, organized by Singer, but</div><div>supported by Heartland, involving Craig Idso of CSCDGC.</div><div>Singer had some modest involvement with tobacco, but Heartland has had</div><div>much more, including a long-time Philip Morris Board member, Roy</div><div>Marden. Appendix §F highlights the tobacco industry’s creation of</div><div>modern anti-science to defend business that relied almost entirely on</div><div>addicting children. That fact led to a “race to the bottom” in which</div><div>tobacco companies competed to first reach younger children.</div><div>Think tanks engaged in another “race to the bottom” as they competed for</div><div>tobacco funds. The LTDL allowed reconstruction of at least the Philip</div><div>Morris payments 1991-2001,</div><div>55 Fig. F.4. It seems unlikely that think tanks</div><div>
</div><div>55 The LTDL data stops at 2001. However, Philip Morris and RJR remained on</div><div>Heartland’s donor lists through the last known, 2002, and Heartland kept Marden</div><div>suddenly stopped working with tobacco companies. Fig. F.5 shows a</div><div>sample of the actions performed on behalf of PM. §0.7 offers a side-byside</div><div>comparison of tobacco and climate tactics.</div><div>§G starts with a passionate defense of Joe Camel, the most successful</div><div>child-addiction campaign, written by Heartland President Joseph Bast. He</div><div>then wrote to Philip Morris, boasted of Heartland’s past tobacco-supportive</div><div>efforts and its competencies in reaching public officials. He asked for</div><div>more money. Heartland pervasively touts to its donors its access to public</div><div>officials. Discussion expands to other 1999-2002 donors, then to a few</div><div>elements of Heartland’s outreach tor public officials regarding climate.</div><div>§H analyzes Heartland’s finances, including known donors over the last 10</div><div>years, §H.1 Its grant patterns hint at being used as a money conduit, §H.3.</div><div>§H.4 examines dubious transfers to foreign non-charity groups.</div><div>§I describes the surprising major source of Heartland funding in recent</div><div>years, DONORS, which lets foundations give anonymously.</div><div>§K details the Idso family’s CSCDGC, now acting a subcontractor for</div><div>Heartland, with odd funding of its own. SPPI is run by Robert Ferguson</div><div>and there is no obvious connection, but he has been by far CSCDGC’s</div><div>best-paid employee. SPPI is a fake entity, a PO box and website.</div><div>§N quotes short relevant commentary from credible science entities.</div><div>§P offers an example of a small group (OH-AIPG) that embraced</div><div>Heartland’s anti-science, relabeled it science and sent it to legislators.</div><div>§W-§X summarize the contents of 1700+ pages of E&CN, targeted at</div><div>elected officials, suffused with anti-science and attacks on scientists.</div><div>§Y.1 explains the satellite temperature untruths found in ~all E&CNs.</div><div>§Y.2 explains the untruths in E&CN’s Crichton campaign.</div><div>§Z offers ~110 pages of E&CN excerpts, with annotations. They are used</div><div>as examples and encouragements to select a few E&CN issues to peruse.</div><div>Few will read all that, but skimming some may be instructive.</div><div>
</div><div>on the Board through 2008. As seen in §W.4, tobacco articles and advertisements</div><div>were common in E&CN.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>15</div><div>2 SEPP, Singer and 2 years of dead Chairman</div><div>Fred Singer’s56 Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) claims</div><div>to do research science and education, but Singer misinforms the public,</div><div>Tax forms show clear untruths and opportunities for mis-use.</div><div>Singer has been a tireless producer of climate anti-science, but little or no</div><div>real science, for the last few decades. Via AdTI he has also taken tobacco</div><div>money to cast doubt on dangers of secondhand smoke.57 He has been</div><div>involved with TASSC, funded by Philip Morris and Exxon. He has</div><div>worked closely with the George Marshall Institute (GMI)58 and has been</div><div>involved in numerous climate anti-science activities.59</div><div> §C, §W, IRS-0E.</div><div>SEPP, founded in 1992, has usually been mostly Fred Singer himself, with</div><div>some help from GMI and a few others. Frederick Seitz60 was SEPP</div><div>Chairman, and William Nierenberg was Science Advisor. Singer’s thenwife</div><div>Candace Crandall was involved for a few years.</div><div>
</div><div>56web.archive.org/web/20100117150834/www.sepp.org/about%20sepp/bios/singer</div><div>/cvsfs.html</div><div>57 ORE2010 pp.152-153, MAS2010 pp.154-155. Money via AdTI.</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qwi82c00/pdf Alexis de Tocqueville, TASSC</div><div>58 ORE2010, MAS2010, MAS2010a</div><div>59 MAS2010 pp.154-155, pp.97-99 gives matrix of people versus activities and</div><div>organizations. Singer seems to favor interviews with entities demonstrably nonexpert</div><div>on climate, such as the National Association of Scholars, which called him</div><div>a “genius.” www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?doc_id=1726 for context see:</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/nas-president-peter-wood-wrong-dishonest-or-hopelesslycompromised</div><div>See p.17 of the PDF.</div><div>60 But Philip Morris already considered Seitz not rational enough in 1989.</div><div>SEPP’s Board finally changed:61</div><div> (my comments in parentheses)</div><div>02/12/11 Fred Singer, SEPP Newsletter TWTW, p.462</div><div>“Governance: With the passing of SEPP chairman Prof Frederick Seitz, 63 we</div><div>reconstituted the Board of Directors:</div><div>Chairman: S. Fred Singer (and President)</div><div>Vice Chairman: Kenneth A. Haapala64 (and Exec VP, economist)</div><div>Directors: Donna Fitzpatrick Bethell,</div><div>65 former Under Secretary, US Dept of</div><div>Energy (lawyer)</div><div>Mark Brandsdorfer, Esq66</div><div> (lawyer)</div><div>Thomas Sheahen,</div><div>67 PhD (MIT, Physics)” (superconductor physicist)</div><div>SEPP is now (mostly) Singer and others who seem sure that mainstream</div><div>climate science is simply wrong, albeit with little relevant expertise.</div><div>
</div><div>61MAS2010 pp. 19-20, 147</div><div>62 www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2011/TWTW%202011-2-12.pdf</div><div>63 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Seitz Seitz died 03/02/08.</div><div>64 www.desmogblog.com/ken-haapala Economist, Heartland, NIPCC, etc.</div><div>65 MAS2011f, see this as illustration of the depth of ideological anti-science.</div><div>66 www.legalplanner.com/about/mark.html , “he specializes in trademark law,</div><div>business law, non-profit law, and tax law.”</div><div>67 www.desmogblog.com/another-silly-climate-petition-exposed, pp.119-120.</div><div>’… dismisses the idea of a “consensus” on man-made global warming. Sheahen</div><div>wrote to EPW on June 11, 2007. “No one disputes that the Earth has been</div><div>warming over the last 150 years. The controversy is over whether it’s natural or</div><div>anthropogenic (AGW),” … Given the observations of temperature variations</div><div>during the 20th century, you really can’t make the case that mankind caused such</div><div>erratic temperature swings, …””</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>16</div><div>SEPP Chairman Frederick Seitz 68 (July 4, 1911 – March 2, 2008) was 96</div><div>upon death, but according to Singer he still worked an hour /week for</div><div>SEPP in 2008 and 2009, although he received no compensation.69 From</div><div>2004 onward, Singer filled the forms by hand, with no Paid Preparer:</div><div>SEPP 2008 Form 990, filed 05/14/09, p.7</div><div>SEPP 2009 Form 990, filed 04/09/10, p.8</div><div>
</div><div>68 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Seitz</div><div>69 This resembles OISM, run by Singer’s long-time associate Arthur Robinson. As</div><div>of 10/01/11, Martin D. Kamen (August 27, 1913 -August 31, 2002) and R. Bruce</div><div>Merrifield (July 15, 1921 – May 14, 2006) are still listed as OISM “faculty”:</div><div>www.oism.org and the website features their picture. Robinson ran for Congress.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_B.Robinson</div><div>Public charities should have responsible Board governance. 70</div><div>? Perhaps Singer had a good spirit medium, and Seitz was still advising,</div><div>pro bono. If so, Board meetings, if any, must have been interesting.</div><div>? Perhaps Singer did not notice Seitz’ death, since 19 years earlier:</div><div>“Dr. Seitz is quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice.”</div><div>71</div><div>? Perhaps Singer had noticed, but did not wish to expose the lack of</div><div>serious Board governance. 72</div><div> If so, he lied to the IRS.</div><div>Each year, Singer was the keeper of books and signed the statement:</div><div>“Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this return,</div><div>including schedules and statements, and to the best of my knowledge and belief,</div><div>it is true, correct and complete.”73 IRS-9M</div><div>Could these handwritten entries be accidental oversights?</div><div>Or were they evidence that these 990s might be filled with careless,</div><div>erroneous and misleading entries indicating poor governance?</div><div>For 2008 and 2009, Part VI, the NO box was checked for:</div><div>10 Was a copy of the Form 990 provided to the organization’s governing body</div><div>before it was filed? 74</div><div>11 Is there any officer, director or trustee, or key employee listed in Part VII,</div><div>Section A, who cannot be reached at the organization’s mailing address?</div><div>Certainly Seitz was not reachable at SEPP. IRS-9M</div><div>Given these absurdly-untruthful claims on official documents, why</div><div>would anyone place credence in anything Singer says or writes?</div><div>
</div><div>70 www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/governance_practices.pdf See especially 3.</div><div>Brandsdorfer and Dir. Gelman might be asked about their Board duties.</div><div>71 www.desmogblog.com/new-oregon-petition-promoter-not-sufficiently-rationalto-advise-tobacco-industry;</div><div>tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2023266534.html</div><div>72 Singer edited the NIPCC2008 Report. Seitz, 96, wrote the Foreword (with high</div><div>praise for Singer!), just before his death. Singer then wrote, p.iii:</div><div>“Dr. Seitz passed away on March 2, 2008 at the age of 96. He will be greatly</div><div>missed by all of us who knew and admired him.” Singer certainly knew.</div><div>heartland.org/policy-documents/nature-not-human-activity-rules-climate-pdf</div><div>73 Singer and Brandsdorfer might study 26 U. S. C.§ 6065, 26 U. S. C. § 7206(1):</div><div>www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6065.html</div><div>www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/7206.html#1 Perjury is a felony, up to 3 years.</div><div>74 Gelman and Brandsdorfer might be asked if they ever saw any Form 990s.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>17</div><div>3 SEPP’s funny finances</div><div>Singer has long been a close ally of GMI, but SEPP has extra potential for</div><div>tax avoidance, obscured money flows, and unreported lobbying. 75 SEPP:</div><div>? as a tax-advantaged charity, had mostly unknown “donors”</div><div>? had paid no salaries, including Singer for 60-hrs/week.76 IRS-7F</div><div>? paid for vague activities, not specific accomplishments, letting Singer</div><div>move money around with no credible Board oversight. IRS-7F</div><div>? often listed bigger asset sales than other income, hinting at a possible</div><div>role as tax shelter for frequent stock trading, tax-free. IRS-7F</div><div>? had a “President,” a more impressive title than just “Fred Singer.”</div><div>77</div><div>Fig. 3.1 illustrates SEPP finances 2002-2010.</div><div>Money arrived from mostly-unspecified sources, split between Public</div><div>Support and Program Services. Singer identified $183K for NIPCC,78 but</div><div>almost everything else was unknown. §A examines SEPP Form 990s for</div><div>governance issues plus various financial details and chronologies. From</div><div>1997 to 2010, assets increased by $1,363K, with a pattern of stockchurning</div><div>unusual for non-profits. SEPP never paid salaries in these years,</div><div>even as Singer claimed to work 40 or 60 hours/week. Most money went to</div><div>vaguely-specified “Program Expenses.” Singer has long history with</div><div>tobacco and fossil interests, §B. Funding alone does not prove his claims</div><div>wrong, but does calibrate credibility. Science proves his claims wrong.</div><div>SEPP has little trace of real science or education, §C, §W, IRS-0E but</div><div>much advocacy and disinformation, especially via Heartland’s E&CN and</div><div>NIPCC reports The latter looks science-like to the public. SEPP seems a</div><div>tax-free consultancy/advocacy business that has done well over the last</div><div>decades.</div><div>
</div><div>75 MAS2010, p.73</div><div>76 He might have multiple pensions, but clearly can spend SEPP money at will.</div><div>Given no salaries, neither payroll tax nor personal income taxes need be paid.</div><div>Spare cash could stay in SEPP, where it could be invested tax-free.</div><div>77 Singer often attached “University of Virginia,” but forgot “Emeritus.”</div><div>Unlike many Emeritus professors who live nearby and remain involved, he has not</div><div>really been associated with U VA since 1994.</div><div>78 Heartland specified only $15K to SEPP directly, §H.3. It is very likely</div><div>Heartland paid for most or all or this work, but the funding chain is obscured.</div><div>NOTE: clouds in diagrams mean the money sources are unknown.</div><div>Fig. 3.1 – SEPP at a glance 1998-2010</div><div>A23- $1,363K - Public Support</div><div>A23+A24 - $1,805K - Public Support + Program Service Total</div><div>A24 - $633K - Program Service</div><div>A37 - $1,363K - Increase in Assets</div><div>A34 - $1211K - Total Expenses</div><div>A31 -$1045K - Program</div><div>Service Expenses</div><div>$166K - Other</div><div>expenses</div><div>$0 - Salaries</div><div>NIPCC $?</div><div>SEPP Board governance Singer</div><div>Heartland</div><div>$15K $168K $449K</div><div>NIPCC $143K + $40K</div><div>A29 - $418K Gain on</div><div>investment income</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>18</div><div>4 Heartland, tobacco, NIPCC and CSCDGC</div><div>Some think tanks act as tax-free PR/lobbying agencies that seem</div><div>independent. A maze of murky money movements connects funders with</div><div>think tanks and spokespeople, Fig. F.1 is general, §ES.1 specific.</div><div>Many of the tactics for climate anti-science were</div><div>originally developed by the tobacco industry.</div><div>79</div><div> They had</div><div>once used tobacco industry groups, but later preferred</div><div>“independent” front groups and even more</div><div>“independent” think tanks. Many of the same</div><div>organizations and sometimes the same people have been</div><div>involved with tobacco advocacy and climate antiscience,</div><div>so §F’s tobacco context in is extremely relevant:</div><div>? Tobacco legal settlements have created public records of strategies,</div><div>interactions and financial transactions. Those offer great insights.</div><div>? Tobacco companies have known for decades they survived only by</div><div>addicting children to something that will kill many of them, slowly.</div><div>Many think tanks seemed eager to help and begged for money to do so.</div><div>That may help readers calibrate their credibility elsewhere.</div><div>Heartland is a media advocacy business run by Joseph Bast and his wife,</div><div>Diane Carol Bast. They have sought and gotten tobacco funding</div><div>frequently during the 1990s and 2000s, and have been strong tobacco</div><div>defenders, §F, §G. Philip Morris’ Roy Marden became a Heartland Board</div><div>member no later than 1996 and continued through 2008. Bast80 wrote</div><div>passionately in support of the “Joe Camel” campaign, well-documented as</div><div>the most effective USA campaign to target children, §G.1. IRS-0E</div><div>Bast’s letter to Philip Morris touted Heartland’s abilities to reach US</div><div>elected officials, as have Heartland’s donations pages, advertisements and</div><div>conferences and E&CN, §W. Although this certainly seems like lobbying,</div><div>Heartland 990s deny lobbying activity. If this somehow stays within the</div><div>letter of the 501(c)(3) law, it violates the spirit. IRS-5L</div><div>Heartland stopped listing donors sometime after 2003, and has never said</div><div>much about amounts, so donor patterns must be assembled from</div><div>
</div><div>79 PRO2012 pp.257-304, §H.3</div><div>80 Here, “Bast” alone indicates Joseph Bast, as he is more frequently mentioned.</div><div>fragmentary information, §G.2. Donors have included tobacco and</div><div>petroleum companies, plus many of the same family foundations that have</div><div>funded other think tanks promoting climate anti-science.81</div><div> In the last</div><div>decade, Heartland seems to have expanded strongly into climate antiscience</div><div>advocacy, concurrent with rising revenues from DONORS</div><div>TRUST, a “donor-advised fund” whose original sources are hidden, but</div><div>quite likely involve a few of the same families, §H.1, §I.</div><div>Heartland has run 6 climate conferences 2008-2011, including one in</div><div>Australia. It has paid trip expenses for government officials.</div><div>82</div><div> These</div><div>conferences claim to be science, but are really doubt-creation efforts</div><div>strongly criticized by one of the world’s two most prestigious science</div><div>journals, Nature, §N. IRS-0E</div><div>It has leveraged its legislative-distribution system to promote climate antiscience</div><div>materials, including “Experts” and Singer’s NIPCC Reports,</div><div>advertised to public and legislators. They look like science but are not.</div><div>Heartland’s financials, §H.1, are more conventional than SEPP’s, although</div><div>like SEPP, money comes from unidentified sources and often gets sent to</div><div>unidentified places, sometimes outside the US. IRS-10F At least it pays</div><div>salaries and there is no large buildup of assets by stock trading,</div><div>In line with claims of government access, program services expenses</div><div>include explicit mentions of work “educating and informing local, state</div><div>and national elected officials.” §H.2.</div><div>Heartland tries to reach both elected officials and the public.</div><div>83</div><div>Its grants were sometimes odd, §H.3, seeming to be pass-thrus from</div><div>elsewhere. Singer claimed to get $143K (2007) and $40K (2010) for</div><div>NIPCC, which one would naturally expect to have come from Heartland.</div><div>However, Heartland in 2007 listed only $15K for SEPP, and $120K spread</div><div>among 4 foreign entities who do climate anti-science, 3 of which seem not</div><div>to be charities in their own countries. That could be a problem. IRS-10F</div><div>
</div><div>81 But it is curious to find Proctor and Gamble adjacent to Philip Morris as a</div><div>Platinum Sponsor in 1999 and Whole Foods in 1999-2002.</div><div>82 Staffers of Joe Barton (R-TX) attended often.</div><div>83 This is sometimes called treetops and grassroots politics.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>19</div><div>With NIPCC, Singer (and then with Craig Idso and Bob Carter) led a team</div><div>including 20+ of his foreign national friends, §E, to produce reports to be</div><div>feed the Heartland distribution system . Serious climate scientists</div><div>criticized the reports and so did Nature, §N. Loose ends remain in the</div><div>participation and funding flows between Heartland and Craig Idso ‘s</div><div>CSCDGC, §K. NIPCC slightly resembles the tobacco industry’s fake</div><div>science bodies, such as the Council For Tobacco Research. IRS-0E</div><div>Heartland created an ideology distribution channel and marketed it well:</div><div>? A receiver of funds treatable as charitable gifts by the donors.</div><div>? A PR agency, in effect, but tax-free.</div><div>? A lobbying entity, although the rules are complex.84</div><div>
</div><div>It repeatedly promotes its access to legislators. IRS-5L</div><div>? In some cases, possibly a conduit of (charitable-deduction) money to</div><div>other charities and non-charities. IRS-7F IRS-10F</div><div>? It accepts money from companies that benefit by privatizing profits</div><div>and socializing the risks/costs, whose extreme example is tobacco.</div><div>Heartland seems a PR/lobbying group seeking customers.</div><div>See its 2011 Prospectus85 or the current Heartland “About” page: 86</div><div>“Mission: Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions</div><div>to social and economic problems. …</div><div>Policy Advisors: Approximately 130 academics and professional economists</div><div>participate in its peer review process, and more than 200 elected officials serve</div><div>on its Legislative Forum.</div><div>Publications: Heartland sends six monthly public policy newspapers addressing</div><div>the major domestic public policy issues to every national and state elected</div><div>official in the U.S. plus 8,400 county and local officials and thousands of</div><div>civic and business leaders. It also produces books, policy studies, and booklets.</div><div>Communications: We appeared in print and on television or radio nearly 1,400</div><div>times in 2010. More than one million people visited our Web sites in the last 12</div><div>months. Our Facebook page registers nearly 53,000 fans and approximately</div><div>300,0000 post views every week.</div><div>
</div><div>84 www.irs.gov/publications/p557/ch03.html#en_US_2010_publink1000200268</div><div>85 heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/2011Prospectus.pdf especially p.11.</div><div>86 heartland.org/about 01/03/12.</div><div>Government Relations: Our government relations staff made more than one</div><div>million contacts with elected officials in 2010, 14,715 of those contacts were</div><div>one-on-one either in person, by phone, or by one-to-one emails.” IRS-5L?</div><div>Survey Results: A telephone survey of randomly selected state and local elected</div><div>officials conducted in 2011 found 79% of state legislators and 63% of local</div><div>elected officials read at least one of our publications. 45% of state legislators say</div><div>a Heartland publication changed their mind or led to a change in public policy.</div><div>Funding: Approximately 1,800 supporters87 support an annual budget of $6</div><div>million. Heartland does not accept government funding. Contributions are taxdeductible</div><div>under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.”</div><div>For NIPCC, Heartland worked with Craig Idso and his CSCDGC charity,</div><div>which now hosts NIPCC publications.. CSCDGC has a subsidiary charity,</div><div>CO2Science, to which money moves in odd ways. CSCDGC’s highestpaid</div><div>employee is Robert Ferguson ( $321K in 2010), who calls himself</div><div>President of the Science and Public Policy Institute, actually not much</div><div>more than Ferguson, a PO box in a UPS store and a website, plus</div><div>“advisors.” No casual reader would guess SPPI is a CSCDGC front.</div><div>James M. Taylor infused monthly E&CN newspapers with much clear</div><div>disinformation. Among the many examples, the most pervasive was abuse</div><div>of satellite temperature analyses, followed by the continual promotion of</div><div>fakexpert Michael Crichton’s misleading claims as science. E&CN was</div><div>filled with inflammatory words and attacks on scientists, written by</div><div>fakexperts who usually quoted each other for support. IRS-0E</div><div>Behind all this are the funders, some of whom are still unknown, but the</div><div>money trail led to Philanthropy Roundtable, a coordinating body for</div><div>conservative foundations, §I. Charles G. Koch got their 2011 William E.</div><div>Simon Prize.88</div><div> DONORS TRUST and DONORS CAPITAL, run by</div><div>Whitney Ball, were spun off to create “donor-advised” funds. They take</div><div>money from unnamed donors, then make grants with no indication of</div><div>original sources, adding one more step to the murky money maze.</div><div>
</div><div>87 During 2007-2009, more than 50% came from DONORS CAPITAL/TRUST.</div><div>88www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/market_base</div><div>d_man</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>20</div><div>5 Allegations</div><div>SEPP and Singer: I allege that Singer:</div><div>1. committed perjury by claiming a dead Chairman, §2, §A.1,</div><div>a red flag for long-term governance problems. IRS-9M, IRS-6G</div><div>2. Filed 990s with unusual characteristics that let money easily be</div><div>handled in ways that violated the rules, §3, §B, §C. IRS-7F</div><div>3. acted to influence public opinion, perhaps on legislation, and hence</div><div>may run afoul of lobbying limits, §E, §W. IRS-5L?</div><div>4. rarely produced real science or education, but rather voluminous antiscience,</div><div>often climate, sometimes for tobacco, for the public in OpEds,</div><div>articles, talks, not in peer-reviewed journals, §W, §D. IRS-0E</div><div>5. was commissioned to create the NIPCC anti-science reports for its</div><div>channels to legislators and public, §E. IRS-0E</div><div>Any of the above may be sufficient to revoke SEPP charity status, and if</div><div>proven, some of these carry serious financial or legal penalties.</div><div>89</div><div>HEARTLAND, Basts and Taylor I allege that Heartland:</div><div>6. has a long history of taking tobacco money for advocacy, which few</div><div>would call research and education, §F, §G. IRS-0E</div><div>7. publishes a E&CN newsletter pervaded by untruthful or misleading</div><div>claims on science, §W, §X, §Y, §Z. IRS-0E.</div><div>8. has spent lavishly on climate anti-science conferences (ICCC), paying</div><div>government employees to attend. §G.3 IRS-0E, IRS-5L</div><div>9. sponsored Singer and Idso’s NIPCC anti-science reports, heavily</div><div>publicized through its channels to legislators and the public.</div><div>Nature criticized the conferences and the NIPCC, §H, §N. IRS-0E</div><div>10. supported odd money flows, §H.2, §H.3, §K. IRS-7F</div><div>11. has made dubious grants to foreign entities. §H.3, §H.4. IRS-10F</div><div>12. constantly advertises its pervasive ability to reach US legislators and so</div><div>seems to violate 501(c)(3) lobbying rules, §G. IRS-5L</div><div>Any of the above may be sufficient to revoke Heartland charity status,</div><div>which of course also impacts its donors.</div><div>This is “pattern and practice” seen pervasively in E&CN, elsewhere.</div><div>
</div><div>89 Singer’s personal tax returns are (properly) private, so one cannot guess</div><div>penalties, but if charity status is lost, stocks’ $1.3M appreciation might be an issue.</div><div>CSCDGC, CO2Science, Craig Idso, Robert Ferguson §K I allege that:</div><div>13. CSCDGC and CO2Science have dubious governance. The Board is</div><div>the Idso family, §K.1 IRS-6G</div><div>14. CSCDGC and CO2Science have some odd money transfers, §K, as do</div><div>CSCDGC and Robert Ferguson, a well-paid employee. IRS-7F</div><div>15. Ferguson’s SPPI is an anti-science outlet, §K.3 IRS-0E</div><div>16. Craig Idso promotes anti-science, at CO2Science and E&CN. IRS-0E</div><div>Any of the above may be sufficient to revoke charity status.</div><div>Other think tanks, Fig. F.4 I allege that:</div><div>17. Given the well-documented actions of tobacco companies, any think</div><div>tank that took tobacco money was likely not doing so for science or</div><div>education, but for PR and/or lobbying, Fig. F.5. Hence, all in Fig. F.4</div><div>should be examined carefully. Most took money for advocacy in</div><div>support of hurting children. They get $400M+/year. IRS-0E, IRS-5L</div><div>18. Although not documented in detail here, many of these also advocate</div><div>climate anti-science, especially those in Fig. ES.1. [MAS2010]</div><div>Either of the above may be sufficient to revoke charity status for many.</div><div>DONORS TRUST AND CAPITAL, Whitney Ball §I I allege that they:</div><div>19. funded entities to promote anti-science and that specific itemizations</div><div>showed they knew what they were funding, see Fig. H.1 for Heartland</div><div>funding and . §K.1.1 for CSCDGC. IRS-7F</div><div>20. have sent funds directly to CSCDGC employee Ferguson, which might</div><div>be dubious, especially given SPPI’s nature. . §K.3 IRS-0E , IRS-7F</div><div>This also applies to the Lambe and Bradley foundations.</div><div>21. routinely funded entities that have taken money for nonfactual</div><div>advocacy, not education, whether from tobacco companies, fossil</div><div>interests or private foundations. IRS-0E, IRS-5L</div><div>This may be a good reason to revisit donor-advised funds.</div><div>Some of these grants are no more in the public interest than paying</div><div>people to help promote cigarettes to children.</div><div>People might doubt my negative assessments of “science,” but they might</div><div>ask for official comments from the American Geophysical Union, the US</div><div>National Academy of Sciences, the US Centers for Disease Control (on the</div><div>tobacco issues), the UK Royal Society, or journals like Nature or Science.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>21</div><div>6 Conclusions</div><div>I first started looking at the funding patterns of climate anti-science in</div><div>2010. Having now probed much deeper, I now think that some think tanks</div><div>are tax-exempt PR/marketing/lobbying entities whose actions are far</div><div>removed from the public interest. The overall structure seems a perversion</div><div>of the good reasons for having 501(c)3 public charities.</div><div>I would claim that many of these entities might more properly be 501(c)4,</div><div>since there is much evidence their real purpose is advocacy and sometimes</div><div>advocacy directly counter to our best science, following in tobacco’s</div><div>footsteps. If they cannot even follow 501(c)4 rules, they should become</div><div>for-profit PR agencies (like APCO) or lobbyists.</div><div>If they want to be lobbyists and follow the rules, that is fine as well. From</div><div>past studies [MAS2010a] the Washington, DC-area think tanks have</div><div>numerous opportunities for lobbying, with evidence of interesting</div><div>meetings. I am unsure where the lobbying line is, but surely, Heartland is</div><div>far over it, with the constant touting of its access to elected officials,</div><div>invitations to government people, recorded payments for trips, while</div><div>claiming no lobbying. Its focus on state and local governments makes its</div><div>marketing more visible than the DC think tanks.</div><div>This report found and documented in great detail, with examples:</div><div>? Fake science created to mislead the public and legislators.</div><div>? Fake science conferences, the Heartland ICCC’s.</div><div>? Fake science reports, including those of NIPCC and others.</div><div>? Fake education.</div><div>? Fakexperts - Heartland’s supporters are all claimed to be experts, to</div><div>the point the word means nothing. People may know something about</div><div>a topic, enough to fool the unwary, but if most of their comments are</div><div>wrong, they are not real experts. §X.2 lists many fakexperts. Some</div><div>may have the background to know they are wrong, others may not.</div><div>By now E&CN’s James Taylor ought to know enough, but there is not</div><div>the slightest indication of understanding the science or caring.</div><div>? Fake organizations, like NIPCC, whose domain name was owned by</div><div>Heartland, but administered by CSCDGC, perhaps to make it look</div><div>independent. SPPI, whose “President” Ferguson is really an employee</div><div>of CSCDGC is another fake, a PO Box in a suburban UPS store.</div><div>? Fake or at least dubious money flows.</div><div>? Fake or at least dubious foundations. If the rules allow donor-advised</div><div>foundations to anonymize dubious donations, the rules should be</div><div>changed. DONORS certainly looks like it was set up to do that,</div><div>splitting donations among advocacy groups and normal charities.</div><div>It is perfectly fine for people to advocate their positions, and argue about</div><div>the shape and size of government. They could argue openly about policies.</div><div>For policy advocacy, these think tanks promote nonfactual anti-science and</div><div>manage to do it tax-free. Legitimate 501(c)(3) charities do not.</div><div>I am sad that Conservative/Libertarian donors seem dedicated to think</div><div>tanks whose ethics were calibrated by their scramble for tobacco money.</div><div>Can they not find ethical think tanks to represent legitimate smallgovernment</div><div>ideas? Heartland continually talks about liberty and freedom</div><div>and invokes Franklin and Jefferson. But Heartland has for almost 2</div><div>decades helped tobacco companies hurt children.</div><div>90</div><div> Joseph Bast bragged</div><div>about his defense of Joe Camel, the most successful US campaign to get</div><div>younger kids smoking. Obviously, some people must not care, as they</div><div>seem happy to lend their names to Heartland and cooperate with it. Many</div><div>of Heartland’s fakexperts have worked for tobacco-friendly think tanks.</div><div>Why would anyone trust their opinions?</div><div>Compared to the marketing skill needed to reach children and create</div><div>addiction that will eventually kill half, confusing people about climate</div><div>science is child’s play. Heartland relentlessly marketed a climate</div><div>fakexpert, Michael Crichton, for years.</div><div>91</div><div>With the right political will, we could fix the tobacco problem92 and we</div><div>could move away from fossil fuels in a disciplined way, over many</div><div>decades, but we cannot fool the physics of climate, lobby it or vote it out.</div><div>In the long run, it could well hurt humanity worse than tobacco.93</div><div>
</div><div>90 Any help to tobacco companies has that effect.</div><div>91 MAS2011f, Even educated people like James Schlesinger quoted Crichton, as</div><div>though he were a real climate scientist who actually knew something.</div><div>92 PRO2012, Ch.30</div><div>93 PRO2012 p.2. Proctor expects a billion deaths from tobacco in 21st century.</div><div>Heartland and the other think tanks did their paid best to help. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>22</div><div>A. SEPP 1998-2010 by Form 990s</div><div>A.1 Governance or lack thereof</div><div>Fig. A.1.1 Board, roles, hours/week</div><div>Form 990 changed several times, with different Line numbers.</div><div>Of course, years 1992-1997 would be useful (AdTI, TASSC)</div><div>WARNING: the line labels are just unique local tags used here,</div><div>unrelated to IRS lines.</div><div>A2, A3: Years 1998-2003 were typewritten, listing Sallie Edmiston as Paid</div><div>Preparer 2002-2003.94</div><div>From 2004-2010, all forms were handwritten and signed only by Singer.</div><div>A5: After his death at 96, Seitz worked an hour/week for ~2 more years.</div><div>A7: Charles Gelman95 (December 15, 1931-) was a long-time SEPP Board</div><div>member, and has donated to SEPP and similar entities, but his last</div><div>donation seems to have been in 2002, so his later involvement is unclear.96</div><div>
</div><div>94 Preparer’s name is blacked before 2002, but SSN is the same in 2000.</div><div>95 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Charles_Gelman born 12/15/31.</div><div>Gelman Education Foundation donated to SEPP and others. Its 2002 990’s</div><div>“Environmental” category includes CATO, CFACT, CEI, ELC, Heartland</div><div>Institute, Manhattan Institute, PRI, Reason and SEPP. Most took tobacco money</div><div>and fought environmental regulations. Gelman gave SEPP $3,000 in 2002, but I</div><div>found none after, so perhaps he had become less engaged. Quite possibly, by mid-</div><div>2008, Gelman was not really active, (he was 78 by then) leaving only lawyer</div><div>Brandsdorfer. This seems a fake Board, starting earlier. IRS-6G</div><div>96 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=383197904</div><div>A12: Until 2010, Singer claimed to have worked almost all hours himself.</div><div>A13: Some charities actually pay no salaries, but more commonly, fulltime</div><div>staff get paid (taxable) salaries. Singer plausibly has several</div><div>pensions, but since money can be invested and stocks traded tax-free</div><div>through SEPP, it would appreciate much faster there than in taxable</div><div>personal accounts. This structure is maximally tax-efficient for Singer and</div><div>for funders who can claim charitable deductions.</div><div>The 1998-2000 returns claim audited results, 2002-2010 do not.</div><div>Given all this, one might ask:</div><div>? Has anyone but Singer understood or overseen the finances?</div><div>97</div><div>
</div><div>? Is it imaginable that the Board could remove Singer?</div><div>? Has this been a real Board during this time or a fake one?</div><div>? Do these seem like careful, serious returns, especially 2004-2010?</div><div>
</div><div>97 SEPP’s 990s encompass obscure money transfers. Brandsdorfer has been the</div><div>only other long-term Board member and someone might want to ask him some</div><div>questions about SEPP governance.</div><div>If someone can find R. Lieberman, Esq, perhaps he may shed light on SEPP. Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>A1 Preparation Date 08/14/99 08/02/00 05/13/01 N/A 05/15/03 04/30/04 05/12/05 06/10/06 06/27/07 05/15/08 05/14/09 04/09/10 05/10/11</div><div>A2 Signature: "correct & complete" Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer Singer</div><div>A3 Paid Preparer ? ? Edmiston Edmiston Edmiston - - - - - - -</div><div>A4 S. Fred Singer, Pres Pres - ? Pres - ? Pres - ? Pres - 40 Pres - 40 Pres - 40 Pres - ? Pres - 60 Pres - 60 Pres - 60 Pres - 60 Pres - 60 Pres - 60</div><div>A5 Frederick Seitz, Chair, -03/02/08 Chair - ? Chair - ? Chair - ? Chair - 1 Chair - 0 Dir - 0 Chair - ? Chair - 1 Chair - 1 Chair - 1 Chair - 1 Chair - 1 deceased</div><div>A6 C. Gelman, Dir Dir - ? Dir - ? Dir - ? Dir - 1 Dir - 0 Dir - 0 Dir - ? Dir - 1 Dir - 1 Dir - 1 Dir - 1 Dir - 1</div><div>A7 Mark Brandsdorfer, Dir Dir - ? Dir - ? Dir - ? Dir - 1 Dir - 0 Dir - 0 Dir - ? Dir -2 Dir -2 Dir -2 Dir - 1 SecTrs - 1 SecTrs - 5</div><div>A8 R. Lieberman, Esq Dir - 1 -</div><div>A9 K.A. Haapala Exec VP - 30</div><div>A10 T. Sheahen Dir - 5</div><div>A11 D. Bethell Dir - 5</div><div>A12 TOTAL HOURS/WEEK ? ? ? 43 40 40 ? 64 64 64 64 65 105</div><div>A13 Total salaries $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0</div><div>A14 Audit claimed? y Y Y N N N N N N N N N N</div><div>?: Hours omitted.</div><div>Paid Preparer</div><div>IRS-6G, IRS-7F, IRS-9X</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>23</div><div>A.2 Financials overview</div><div>Fig. A.2.1 Financials from 990s</div><div>Form 990 changed several times, with different Line numbers.</div><div>A24.2007 (p.8, Line 93) seems to be the payment from Heartland:</div><div>$143K “preparation of envir report NIPCC.” See §H.3, only $15K.</div><div>“Includes lecture fees paid directly to SEPP as a donation.”98</div><div>A24.2010 (p.9, Lines 2a and 2b) “NIPCC Book $40,000” and “Purdue</div><div>Conference $10,000”99</div><div>A27: Gross sales of assets are often large fractions or even exceed assets at</div><div>beginning of year (A36), indicating substantial tax-free stock trading. See</div><div>especially A27.2007, where gross sales is ~3x larger than A36.2007.</div><div>
</div><div>98 2007 Heartland 990 p.2, Line says $135,000. P.17 says $25K each to NRSP,</div><div>FCPC, NZCSC, and $15K to SEPP, §H.3.</div><div>207.153.189.83/EINS/363309812/363309812_2007_044DB1FF.PDF</div><div>99 www.purdue.edu/newsroom/events/2010/100920GlobalTalk.html</div><div>A37.2003: last year by professional preparer. Did $116K then disappear?</div><div>A38: Assets are listed through 2004, then no more. Some of the earlier</div><div>years seem to show Calls and Shorts, perhaps atypical of non-profits.</div><div>A39: During all these years, Singer claims to have done no lobbying and</div><div>made no attempts to influence public opinion.100</div><div>Most numbers seem to add properly, but known errors are marked.</div><div>Do these returns seem appropriately careful?</div><div>Do these numbers describe reality? How would anyone know?</div><div>
</div><div>100 I allege that most of Singer’s efforts have attempted to influence public opinion,</div><div>not through real science in credible peer-reviewed literature (of which he has</div><div>done very little) but via books, talks, letters, newsletters, petitions and articles in</div><div>Heartland E&CN, §C,§W. He was wrong on the use of UAH satellites, §Y.1.</div><div>990 Form #1 Form #2</div><div>Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOTALS</div><div>Preparation Date #1 #3 08/14/99 08/02/00 05/13/01 08/10/02 05/15/03 04/30/04 05/12/05 06/10/06 06/27/07 05/15/08 05/14/09 04/09/10 05/10/11</div><div>A21 Direct Public Support 1a III.1 73,335 81,593 190,758 110,960 77,259 27,240 53,208 102,260 74,180 174,600 166,930 123,300 59,286 1,314,909</div><div>A22 Indirect public support 1b 15,750 32,620 48,370</div><div>A23 Total 1f 8 73,335 81,593 190,758 126,710 109,879 27,240 53,208 102,260 74,180 174,600 166,930 123,300 59,286 1,363,279</div><div>A24 Program Service Rev 2 9 92,750 44,956 950 64,326 0 122,000 41,511 14,700 0 143,000 31,750 26,350 50,000 632,293</div><div>A25 Interest 4 1,050 366 25,537</div><div>A26 Div & interest, securities 5 1,810 15,296 15,149 11,329 1,788 3,630 4,360 6,428 18,677</div><div>A27 Gross sales of assets 8a 183,735 257,577 45,284 386,152 426,675 499,389 735,888 590,588 3,034,720</div><div>A28 Less cost 8b 173,673 224,039 40,974 522,814 528,724 492,376 697,284 529,611 2,808,277</div><div>A29 Gain/loss OR invest income 8c 10 10,062 33,538 4,310 -136,662 -102,049 7,013 38,604 60,977 332,217 226,443 -654,974 461,618 137,057 418,154</div><div>A30 TOTAL REVENUE 12 12 203,366 188,670 212,299 65,703 10,668 160,249 137,683 184,365 325,704 569,580 -423,268 626,779 251,584 2,513,382</div><div>A31 Expense - Program Services 13 III.4e 94,055 43,474 108,519 93,968 44,869 40,695 44,209 27,650 33,604 34,843 213,237 96,012 169,500 1,044,635</div><div>A32 Expense - Mgmt&General 14 23,854 10,129 11,865 10,092 13,890 15,334 5,625 4,706 1,200 1,730</div><div>A33 Expense - Fundraising 15 5,541 1,640 2,893 2,580 2,185 0 5,360 1,193 800 705</div><div>A34 TOTAL EXPENSES 17 18 123,450 55,243 123,277 106,640 60,944 56,029 55,194 33,549 35,604 37,278 213,237 111,239 199,842 1,211,526</div><div>A35 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES 18 19 79,916 133,427 89,022 -40,937 -50,276 104,220 82,489 150,816 290,100 532,302 -636,505 515,540 51,742 1,301,856</div><div>A36 Net assets, begin year 19 22 220,855 300,771 434,198 523,220 482,283 432,007 598,940 718,429 869,245 1,159,345 1,691,647 1,055,142 1,532,381 APPREC:</div><div>A37 Net Assets, end of year 21 22 300,771 434,198 523,220 482,283 432,007 714,531 681,429 869,245 1,159,345 1,691,647 1,055,142 1,502,589 1,584,123 1,363,268</div><div>A38 Assets listed Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N N N</div><div>A39 Lobbying?Influence public? N N N N N N N N N N N N N</div><div>A40 Grants & allocations 22 IX 7,700 3,540 15,770 1,565 1,050 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55,000 < Odd</div><div>A41 Public Support % 26f 59.48% 40.37% 36.10% 34.64% 48.96% 37.79% 45.50% 42.20% 45.00% 42.00% 70.00% 65.00% 77.50%</div><div>NOTES: Do not match previous Errors, do not add correctly:A 31.2007, A34.2008, A35.2008. APPRECIATION = $1,363K = A37.2010 - A366.1998</div><div>Form #3</div><div> Lines Color Line</div><div>IRS-7F</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>24</div><div>Fig. A.2.2 Support, expenses</div><div>Fig. A.2.2 shows the major non-investment incomes (A23, A24),</div><div>Expenses (A34), and Revenue less Expenses (A35).</div><div>On the same scale, assists and trades are shown at right in Fig. A.2.3.</div><div>Gross sales of Assets (A27, only available separately through 2007) dwarfs</div><div>the other incomes above.</div><div>In 2007, it was almost 3X larger than the assets at beginning of year.</div><div>It seems hard to explain that except by multiple trades within the year.</div><div>In 1998, p.15 and 1999, p.12, many stock trades seem to have been Calls</div><div>or Shorts.</div><div>All this seems fairly unusual trading activity for this sort of non-profit.</div><div>In any case, from YE1997 to YE2010, the appreciation of assets and the</div><div>total public support balanced, A23.Total ~A.37.Total. Meanwhile,</div><div>Program Service Revenue plus Gain on investment income closely</div><div>matched Program expenses. Since money is fungible, one cannot say</div><div>where most dollars really went, but in effect, consulting plus investments</div><div>paid the bills, and contributions effectively turned into SEPP assets.</div><div>Fig. A.2.3 Assets and trading</div><div>Normally, one might expect Assets at beginning of year to equal Assets at</div><div>the end of previous year, but this is not true for 2004 and 2005, the first</div><div>two prepared by Singer. Either these are errors, restatements or money</div><div>disappeared and some returned.</div><div>A regression line is shown on A37, year-end assets, which grew $1,363K</div><div>from YE1997 to YE2010, with claimed investment income of $418.</div><div>101</div><div>
</div><div>Presumably, the other $808K came from mostly from Public Support or</div><div>Program Service Revenue.102</div><div>Summary: Actual operations (Fig. A.3) are far outweighed by assets103</div><div>and even trades (Fig. A.4). IRS-7F</div><div>
</div><div>101 “Eli Rabett” provided forms for 1998-2000 and had pointed out the asset</div><div>management issue years ago: rabett.blogspot.com/2008/12/hard-times-s.html</div><div>102 Possibly, Singer contributed personal funds.</div><div>Who else would know? There was no paid preparer after 2003.</div><div>103 Some types of non-profits, such as museums, do build assets large relative to</div><div>yearly expenses, for building objectives or endowments. SEPP is not a museum.</div><div>-1,000,000</div><div>-500,000</div><div>0</div><div>500,000</div><div>1,000,000</div><div>1,500,000</div><div>2,000,000</div><div>2,500,000</div><div>3,000,000</div><div>1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>A23 Public Support Total A24 Program Service Revenue A30 TOTAL REVENUE</div><div>A34 TOTAL EXPENSES A35 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES</div><div>2008: large stock loss</div><div>-1,000,000</div><div>-500,000</div><div>0</div><div>500,000</div><div>1,000,000</div><div>1,500,000</div><div>2,000,000</div><div>2,500,000</div><div>3,000,000</div><div>1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>A27 Gross sales of assets A29 Gain/loss OR invest income</div><div>A37 Net assets, end of year Linear (A37 Net assets, end of year)</div><div>990 format dropped gross</div><div>sales of assets after 2007</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>25</div><div>Miscellaneous notes for possible future use.</div><div>Fig. A.2.4 Known grants to SEPP</div><div>Program Service Revenue p.6, 2001</div><div>EPRI is the Electric Power Research Institute.104</div><div>FOF seems likely to be Frontiers of Freedom, §K.</div><div>“Naural Gas LLC” is surely some Natural Gas LLC, which is ambiguous.</div><div>Support Schedule, p.9, 2001</div><div>The computations appear to be correct, so it is not clear this means</div><div>anything, but the 34.64% is not far above the 33.33% rule, and it is clear</div><div>that most of the funding comes from a few donors, who generally appear</div><div>not to be foundations from the usual databases, IRS-8P.</div><div>
</div><div>104 www.epri.com</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_Power_Research_Institute</div><div>This is located nearby and I sometimes encounter members of EPRI at local</div><div>energy-related events. EPRI works on renewable/clean energy projects, but has</div><div>long had a strong focus on fossil energy. It would certainly be interesting to know</div><div>why they paid Singer $12K and what he did for them.</div><div>Worksheet for Public Support. p.15, 2001, which was included,</div><div>unnecessarily.</div><div>The 176,820 number was transferred. SEPP’s support came primarily</div><div>from a relatively small number of donors, mostly unknown.</div><div>Gelman matches one line.</div><div>Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>Ames Foundation, K.C. VA 5,000</div><div>Jacobs Family Foundation. CA 2,000</div><div>Bialkin Family Foundation, NY 5,000</div><div>Claude R. Lambe F (Kochs) 0 N/A 0 0 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>Gelman Educational F 5,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 3,000 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0</div><div>TOTAL 5,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 3,000 5,000 5,000 2,000 0 5,000 0 0 0 0</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>26</div><div>A.3 Program expenses</div><div>Form 990s usually show specific program accomplishments. SEPP’s are</div><div>vague and total $1045K (86%) of expenses, 46% ($479K) spent 2008-</div><div>2010, the last 3 years of the 13 covered. Can the reader know from990s:</div><div>? if this work really is research, education and science? IRS-0E</div><div>? or if Singer just spends money as desired? IRS-7F</div><div>Fig. A.3.1 Program Expenses</div><div>A92.2008: “Organizing conferences” $110,037, shows no specifics.</div><div>A42.2008-A44.2008 show program expenses, but Part IX, Line 1 shows</div><div>$55K as “Grants and assistance to governments and organizations in the</div><div>US.” That seems vague and the handling of grants seems inconsistent.</div><div>Singer’s 2004-2010 descriptions seem rather less explicit than those of the</div><div>Paid Preparer. A31.2007’s incorrect $34,843 lowers the A31 total.</div><div>Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>A24 Program Service Rev 92,750 44,956 950 64,326 0 122,000 41,511 14,700 0 143,000 31,750 26,350 50,000</div><div>A31 Expense - Program Services Type 94,055 43,474 108,519 93,968 44,869 40,695 44,209 27,650 33,604 34,843 213,237 96,012 169,500</div><div>A51 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications gP 5,000</div><div>A52 b.Student intern work in preparation of journal articles and reports gP 20,000</div><div>A53 c.Student intern research for prepration of book on global warming gP 20,000</div><div>A54 d.Lectures, conferences, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP ? Is this anyone but Singer? P 49,055</div><div>A55 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications P 3,540</div><div>A56 b.Preparation of journal articles and reports P 11,661</div><div>A57 c.Contract research for preparation of materials on global warming. P 4,030</div><div>A58 d.Lectures, conferences, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP P 24,243</div><div>A59 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications P 15,770</div><div>A60 b.TAP WORKSHOP on May 29-31, 2000, in Farifax, Virginia: Topic: Climate Change Review P 17,544</div><div>A61 c.Contract research for preparation of materials on global warming. P 29,797</div><div>A62 d.Lectures, conferences, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP P 45,408</div><div>A63 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications GP 1,565</div><div>A64 b.Global Climate Science project at COP 6/12 Bonn, Germany including travel expenses for students GP 45,520</div><div>A65 c.Contract research for preparation of materials on global warming and climate science GP 24,520</div><div>A70 d.Lectures, conferences, web site, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP Gp 23,363</div><div>A71 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications GP 1,050</div><div>A72 b.Sponsorships and organization for Milan conference on climate change in December 2003 GP 9,802</div><div>A73 c.Contract research for preparation of materials on global warming GP 29,647</div><div>A74 d.Lectures, conferences, web site, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP Gp 4,370</div><div>A75 a.Stipends to students for assistance in the preparation of environmental studies for dissemination through lectures, conferences and publications GP 4,762</div><div>A76 b.May 2002 Global Climate Science project in Arlington, VA GP 13,795</div><div>A77 c.Contract research for preparation of materials on global warming GP 8,672</div><div>A78 d.Lectures, conferences, web site, and other communications by scientists affiliated with SEPP GP 13,466</div><div>A79 a.Travel for lectures, conferences GP 35,834</div><div>A80 b.Expenses for dissemination of information GP 8,375</div><div>A81 a.Preparation of envir. Studies P 15,000</div><div>A82 b.Dissemination by Web + by mail P 650</div><div>A83 c.Dissemination by lectures at universities, etc P 12,000</div><div>A84 a.Preparation of environmental studies + reports P 15,000</div><div>A85 b.Dissemination by Web + by mail P 650</div><div>A86 c.Dissemination by lectures at universities + meetings P 17,954</div><div>A87 a.Preparation of envir. studies + reports P 15,000</div><div>A88 b.Dissemination by Web + by mail P 650</div><div>A89 c.Dissemination by lectures at universities, etc + by meetings P 21,628</div><div>A90 a.Research + education, writing articles, books, + scientific papers P 31,200</div><div>A91 b.Talks + presentations P 72,000</div><div>A92 c.Organizing conferences P 110,037</div><div>A93 a.Research + education, writing articles, books, + scientific papers P 26,000</div><div>A94 b.Talks + presentations P 50,006</div><div>A95 c.Organizing conferences P 20,006</div><div>A96 a.Research + education, writing articles, books, + scientific papers P 68,000</div><div>A97 b.Talks + presentations P 65,000</div><div>A98 c.Organizing conferences P 36,500</div><div>A99 Totals 94,055 43,474 108,519 94,968 44,869 40,695 44,209 27,650 33,604 37,278 213,237 96,012 169,500</div><div>$1212K Total Expenses,</div><div>$1045 (86%) A34 Expenses here spent on</div><div>(mostly vague) Program Services</div><div>$479K 2008-2010 accounted for 45% of</div><div>Program expenses, large jump over earlier</div><div>years.</div><div>3 years of identical</div><div>(vague) activities</div><div>3 more years of identical</div><div>(vague) activities</div><div>Part IX, p.10, Line 1 claims $55K grant ...</div><div>but that is not listed in these. ></div><div>Treatment of Grants and program</div><div>expenses seems inconsistent.</div><div>gP: grant < Pgm Expense</div><div>P : no grant, just Pgm Expense</div><div>GP: Grant = Pgm Expense, both</div><div>Willie Soon was apparently one of the 2003 "students,"</div><div>and likely N. Shaviv, both of whom already had PhDs. Who are the other "students"?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>27</div><div>During 2008-2010, these expenses (red) strongly increase over earlier</div><div>years. Much more money flowed to these vague categories during a time</div><div>of at-best-minimal governance. Of the total Program Expenses, half was</div><div>incurred in those 3 years. IRS-7F</div><div>The $122K for “Designated program donations” in 2003 is vague.</div><div>The $143K(2007) and $40K(2010) for NIPCC are at least specific,</div><div>although as per Fig. H.5, Part 2, the money seemed to arrive by curious</div><div>routes, since these numbers cannot be found directly in the Heartland 990s.</div><div>Having built assets via years of tax-free investing, maybe Singer finally</div><div>wanted to start withdrawing some money? Or maybe this was NIPCC?</div><div>From the 990s alone, who could tell where this money went?</div><div>Singer reported 60 hours/week, so he was certainly doing something, just</div><div>for no salary and hence no payroll taxes or taxed income from SEPP.</div><div>Fig. A.3.2 Program service revenue vs expenses</div><div>Other interesting expenses in Form 990s</div><div>Payroll Taxes</div><div>1998, p.2, Line 29 Payroll Taxes = $23,650.</div><div>1999, p.2, Line 29 Payroll Taxes = $520.</div><div>2000, p.2, Line 29 Payroll Taxes = ….(none)</div><div>2002-2010 No payroll taxes</div><div>2003 p.13</div><div>“Euro checks to participants 8.500”</div><div>“Airfare for Milan Conference participants Weber, Berner, Heiss – 3,816”105</div><div>“Airfare for students to Milan conference Shariv and Soon – 2,306”106</div><div>2010 p.4, Line 21</div><div>“Did the organization report more than $5,000 of grants and other assistance to</div><div>governments and organizations in the United States on Part IX, column(A), line</div><div>17. If “Yes,” complete Schedule I, parts I and II.</div><div>ANSWER: No.</div><div>But then p.10, Line 1 has:</div><div>“Grants and other assistance to governments and organizations in the U.S.</div><div>See Part IV, line 21.” Total Expenses (A) $55,000.”</div><div>That seems inconsistent. It is certainly opaque, as no recipient is noted.</div><div>But $55K went somewhere, after many years of zero grants.</div><div>2010 p.10, Line 18 shows Occupancy (rent) at $60,000, a sudden jump:</div><div>$13,200 2002</div><div>$15,000 2003-2004</div><div>$18,000 2005-2008</div><div>$19,100 2009</div><div>$60,000 2010</div><div>
</div><div>105 Presumably Gerd-Rainer Weber and Klaus P. Heiss. I do not recognize Berner.</div><div>Heiss was a rocket scientist, Weber is a coal-industry person and Soon is an</div><div>astrophysicist, all listed as NIPCC contributors.</div><div>bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2007/12/who-heck-is-klaus-heiss-or-selling.html</div><div>High Frontier likely coordinated with GMI on missile defense.</div><div>106 This must be Willie Soon and might be a typo of Nir Shaviv.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nir_Shaviv</div><div>Shaviv got his PhD ~1996, Soon ~1991. If they are the students this is odd.</div><div>Singer mentioned “students” often, Figure A.3.1.</div><div>0</div><div>50,000</div><div>100,000</div><div>150,000</div><div>200,000</div><div>250,000</div><div>1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>A24 Program Service Revenue A31 Expense -Program Services A40 Grants & Allocations</div><div>$479K of $ $953K</div><div>Total ~50%</div><div>$143K for "preparation of</div><div>envir report NIPCC"</div><div>$40K for</div><div>"NIPCC</div><div>book"</div><div>$122K for "Designated</div><div>program donations"</div><div>$55K for ??</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>28</div><div>B. SEPP income partially visible, usually obscure</div><div>SEPP rarely discloses income sources, but Singer has often consulted for</div><div>tobacco and energy companies.107 Of course,</div><div>B.1 Tobacco funding chains</div><div>Seitz and Singer were often closely involved with tobacco interests.</div><div>108 109</div><div>Two well-known chains110 connect tobacco companies to Singer:</div><div>Philip Morris111</div><div>APCO112</div><div>TASCC (Steve Milloy) Seitz and Singer were advisors</div><div>Tobacco companies</div><div>Tobacco Institute113 114</div><div>Alexis de Tocqueville Institute (AdTI) 115</div><div>A 1994 paper116 by AdTI Senior Fellow Singer117 and Kent Jeffries (in</div><div>varying roles) attacked the EPA’s stance on secondhand smoke.</div><div>Singer continued in 1996 with his list of top five environmental myths</div><div>including secondhand smoke, global warming, stratospheric ozone.118</div><div>
</div><div>107 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer; www.desmogblog.com/no-apology-isowed-dr-s-fred-singer-and-none-will-be-forthcoming</div><div>
</div><div>108 ORE2010, pp.148-153</div><div>109legacy.library.ucsf.edu/action/search/basic;jsessionid=C94D4056415492F34431</div><div>1167656A1E4C.tobacco03?fd=0&q=fred+singer</div><div>110 MAS2010, p.10 sketches the overall structure of such money flows.</div><div>111 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Morris</div><div>112 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=APCO_Worldwide</div><div>113 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tobacco_Institute</div><div>114</div><div> www.tobaccoinstitute.com/PDF/TCAL0408078.PDF article</div><div>115 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ADTI</div><div>116www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science,economics,and_environmenta</div><div>l_policy:a_critical_examination</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gvr49b00/pdf Says project would cost $20,000.</div><div>117 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dow79b00 Draft lead author Singer</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/axh70e00 Coauthor Singer</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/klh82b00 Singer & Jeffreys brief Congress</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mlh82b00 Author Jeffreys, Principal Reviewer Singer</div><div>See §F and “Tobacco Industry Contractor” in:</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=S.Fred_Singer</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kent_Jeffreys</div><div>Even if Singer had never gotten money directly or indirectly from</div><div>tobacco/fossil sources, IRS-0E rules violations are violations, period.</div><div>B.2 Fossil energy funding chains</div><div>Via Sourcewatch,119 some funding chains have been:</div><div>Coal companies</div><div>Western Fuels Association120</div><div>Robert Balling121</div><div>Singer</div><div>API, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, Texaco, etc</div><div>Global Climate Coalition122</div><div>Singer</div><div>According to ABC News123</div><div>“Singer insists he is not on the payroll of the energy industry, but admits he once</div><div>accepted an unsolicited check from Exxon for $10,000.”</div><div>ExxonMobil</div><div>Singer</div><div>Generous companies just send unsolicited donations, I guess.124</div><div>Funding chains through Heartland are discussed later.</div><div>Singer has worked closely for 2 decades with GMI, whose CEO William</div><div>O’Keefe is a 25-year veteran of API.125 Singer also has had a long</div><div>association with a top ExxonMobil lobbyist, discussed next.</div><div>
</div><div>118 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pca54a99</div><div>119 “Oil Industry Contractor”:</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=S.Fred_Singer</div><div>Western Fuels Association was coal, so “Oil and Coal” would be better.</div><div>120 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Western_Fuels_Association</div><div>121 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Balling</div><div>122 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Climate_Coalition</div><div>MAS2010: William O’Keefe of the API was GCC Chairman, later CEO of GMI.</div><div>123abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/story?id=4506059&page=1#.Tr3</div><div>cE_KwX7g</div><div>124 As often seen in LTDL, think tanks tout past efforts to funders, who then</div><div>provide money for vague purposes, rather than writing specifics, §G.1.</div><div>125 MAS2010, p.144</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>29</div><div>Randy Randol was a key ExxonMobil lobbyist, retired YE2004.126</div><div>? He was on the 1998 GCSCT team with SEPP.</div><div>127</div><div>If Singer did not already know him, he surely made contact thereafter.</div><div>? He is an organizer of the Virginia SEEE, with Singer and Haapala. 128</div><div>? Along with Singer’s Board, he was copied on email, as of 2010.129</div><div>“To: "Canadian Nuclear Discussion List" <CDN-NUCLL@mailman1.cis.mcmaster.ca></div><div>
</div><div>Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] American Thinker:: Renewable electricity hoax, fraud, ripoff</div><div>
</div><div>From: "Jerry Cuttler" <jerrycuttler@rogers.com>161</div><div>?----- Original Message -----</div><div>From: S. Fred Singer</div><div>To: Thomas Lifson</div><div>Cc: ken@haapala.com ; Mark@legalplanner.com ; Tom Sheahen ; Donna</div><div>Bethell ; randy.randol@comcast.net 162</div><div>Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 9:06 AM</div><div>Subject: RE: Renewable electricity hoax, fraud, rip-off</div><div>Thank you, Thomas I was particularly pleased to read some of the comments --</div><div>meatier than the original article</div><div>comments.americanthinker.com/read/42323/646560.html You have</div><div>sophisticated readers. Best Fred? (Fred‘s article attached, published by Lifson)”</div><div>Singer has certainly supported demands for Michael Mann’s email by Ken</div><div>Cuccinelli130</div><div> One might wonder how often Randol and other interesting</div><div>people would appear if Singer’s emails were subpoenaed. One might</div><div>suspect they would be far more interesting than Mann’s.</div><div>Tobacco companies funded some good, but irrelevant, medical science.</div><div>ExxonMobil has funded some good energy research. Still, when someone</div><div>not a medical researcher has taken tobacco money, and has taken fossil</div><div>money, while doing everything possible to discredit climate science,</div><div>people might reflect on possible influences.</div><div>
</div><div>126 MAS2010, p.147.</div><div>127 MAS2010, pp.19-20, 147. Singer’s wife Candace Crandall represented SEPP.</div><div>128 vaseee.org Scientists and Engineers for Energy and Environment</div><div>129 mailman.mcmaster.ca/mailman/private/cdn-nucl-l/1008/msg00001.html</div><div>MAS2011f, p.20</div><div>130 www.americanthinker.com/2010/11/the_global_warming_court_battl.html</div><div>Murky money mazes are often found in both tobacco or climate antiscience</div><div>activities. 131 for example in 1998’s GCSCT:132</div><div>“Potential funding sources were identified as American Petroleum Institute</div><div>(API) and its members; Business Round Table (BRT) and its members, Edison</div><div>Electric Institute (EEI) and its members; Independent Petroleum Association of</div><div>America (IPAA) and its members; and the National Mining Association (NMA)</div><div>and its members.</div><div>Potential fund allocators were identified as the American Legislative Exchange</div><div>Council (ALEC),</div><div>133 Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT),</div><div>Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), Frontiers of Freedom (FF) and The</div><div>Marshall Institute (GMI)." 134</div><div>So, some chains have been:</div><div>Companies</div><div>Trade Associations</div><div>Front groups or think tanks</div><div>Spokespeople of various sorts</div><div>Spokespeople may get money for consulting, as donations to their</div><div>charities, as speaker’s fees, book prizes, etc.</div><div>Singer has been closely associated with GMI since before he started SEPP,</div><div>but has also been working closely with Heartland starting no later than</div><div>2001, as a Contributing Author for E&CN, §X.1. Of 86 issues, he wrote</div><div>articles or was quoted in 47, tied for the lead with Pat Michaels.</div><div>Heartland has seemed to become the main conduit for climate anti-science,</div><div>with a bigger budget and organization of conferences, leveraging its longtime</div><div>connections with elected officials. Heartland paid for the NIPCC</div><div>reports organized by Singer, although the funding chains are obscure.</div><div>Singer reported $183K for NIPCC, but nobody reported him as a recipient</div><div>for that much, just $15K from Heartland.</div><div>
</div><div>131 MAS2010, Figure 1.10, pp. 10, 19-20 on GCSCT.</div><div>www.euronet.nl/users/e_wesker/ew@shell/API-prop.html</div><div>132 Acronyms in Italics added.</div><div>133 MAS2010 p.52. Considered as a potential funds allocator by GCSCT in 1998.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alec</div><div>134 These should be familiar organizations by now.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>30</div><div>C. SEPP research, education, science … not</div><div>C.1 Singer professional background</div><div>Recent years show:</div><div>135</div><div>“POSITIONS HELD:</div><div>1989-</div><div>Director and President, The Science and Environmental Policy Project.</div><div>Foundation-funded, independent research group, incorporated in 1992, to</div><div>advance environment and health policies through sound science. SEPP is a nonprofit,</div><div>education organization.</div><div>1994-2000</div><div>Distinguished Research Professor, Institute for Humane Studies at George</div><div>Mason University, Fairfax, VA</div><div>VISITING POSITIONS:</div><div>1997</div><div>Research Fellow, Independent Institute, Oakland, CA. Global climate change</div><div>research.”</div><div>Books and Monographs (Partial List)</div><div>The Greenhouse Debate Continued (ICS Press, 1992)</div><div>The Scientific Case Against the Global Climate Treaty (SEPP, 1997)</div><div>Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate, (The</div><div>Independent Institute, 1997)</div><div>Articles136</div><div>More than 400 technical publications in scientific, economics, and public policy</div><div>journals.</div><div>More than 200 articles and editorials in the Wall Street Journal, New York</div><div>Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, Chicago</div><div>Tribune, Newsday, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Newsweek, New Republic, National</div><div>Review,, Readers' Digest, and other publications.</div><div>News Media</div><div>Major features in Time, Life, U.S. News & World Report (cover stories on space</div><div>research).</div><div>Numerous radio and television appearances in the United States and abroad:</div><div>ABC News Nightline, NBC TODAY Show, PBS MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour,</div><div>CBS Nightwatch, BBC, CNN, C-SPAN, National Public Radio, …</div><div>
</div><div>135web.archive.org/web/20100117150834/www.sepp.org/about%20sepp/bios/singe</div><div>r/cvsfs.html Archived 01/17/10.</div><div>136 Yes, but where is the science? Where are credible publishers?</div><div>C.2 Peer-reviewed papers few, weak</div><div>Singer has published few climate-science research papers in credible peerreviewed</div><div>journals.137</div><div> He has some Notes and Letters, but following are the</div><div>easily-found climate-relevant papers from 1992 onward.138</div><div>1) S. Fred Singer, “Statistical Analysis does not support a human</div><div>influence on climate,” Energy and Environment, 2002.</div><div>139</div><div>2) David H. Douglass, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer, “Altitude</div><div>dependence of atmospheric temperature trends: Climate models versus</div><div>observation,” Geophysical Research Letters 2004.140</div><div>3) David H. Douglass, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer, Paul C.</div><div>Knappenberger, Patrick J. Michaels, “Disparity of tropospheric and</div><div>surface temperature trends: New evidence,” Geo. Research Letters 2004.</div><div>4) David H. Douglass, John R. Christy, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred</div><div>Singer,</div><div>, “A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model</div><div>predictions,” Intl. J Climatology, 2008.</div><div>141 Singer did a press release:142</div><div>“Climate warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence:</div><div>Carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant.”</div><div>The key point had serious statistical flaws and was strongly refuted by Ben</div><div>Santer, et al. Rather than retract the paper or respond to the scientific</div><div>criticism, Douglass and Christy then wrote “A Climatological Conspiracy”</div><div>in American Thinker, focused irrelevantly on “Climategate. “</div><div>143</div><div>
</div><div>137 www.eecg.utoronto.ca/_{prall/climate/skeptic_authors_table_by_clim}.html and</div><div>www.eecg.utoronto.ca/_{prall/climate}/ are useful resources for authorship.</div><div>138scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=sf+singer&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&</div><div>as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo</div><div>=1992 and checked elsewhere.</div><div>139 MAS2010 p.58, 112-113. E&E climate papers are generally considered “grey</div><div>literature,” given the frequent low-quality papers published there.</div><div>140 Items 2) and 3) relied heavily on the Christy/Spencer UAH satellites, §X.</div><div>141 MAS2009 p.87 describes Douglass’ papers. Douglass, Christy and Singer</div><div>signed the Petition to the APS. Douglass and U of Rochester colleague Knox</div><div>actually invited Viscount Monckton to speak to the UofR physics department.</div><div>142 science-sepp.blogspot.com/2007/12/press-release-dec-10-2007.html</div><div>143This was quickly deprecated at climate scientists’ blog:</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/12/tropical-troposphere-trends</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>31</div><div>5) Fred Singer, “Lack of Consistency Between Modeled and Observed</div><div>Temperature Trends,” Energy and Environment, June 2011.144</div><div>“I thank Roger Cohen and Christopher Monckton for useful discussion, three</div><div>anonymous reviewers for valuable comments, and Robert Warren Anderson145</div><div>and Wm McBride for technical assistance. The author is grateful to Prof. A.</div><div>Zichichi and the Ettore Majorana Foundation for their hospitality and the</div><div>participants of the 2010 Erice Conference for critical discussions. This paper is</div><div>dedicated to my long-term colleague and collaborator Dr. Klaus-Peter Heiss</div><div>(1945 – 2010, Brixen, Alto Adige).”</div><div>146</div><div>The 5 papers might be summarized as follows:</div><div>? 1) and 5) were in a poorly-regarded journal known for climate antiscience,</div><div>E&E.</div><div>? 2) and 3) got into a credible journal, with Singer as 3rd author. They</div><div>were soon rendered irrelevant by discovery of more bugs in the</div><div>Spencer/Christy software that skewed temperatures low, §Y.1.</div><div>? 4) had serious statistical flaws.</div><div>
</div><div>metaclimate.org/2010/02/04/yet-another-chapter-in-the-continuing-saga-as-thedenialists-spin</div><div>has a good collection of the arguments, and links to copies of the</div><div>papers. Ben Santer is a MacArthur Fellow and member of the National Academy</div><div>of Sciences for his work in climate science. .</div><div>www.realclimate.org/docs/Open_Letter_3_to_Community.pdf</div><div>144 www.independent.org/pdf/singer2011.pdf</div><div>Again, E&E lacks credibility on climate science. This copy is posted at TII</div><div>website. Examine the Bibliography to see how often Singer references the same</div><div>authors, obsolete papers, Wall Street Journal OpEds, refuted papers, non-peerreviewed</div><div>work … sources that would never survive credible peer review.</div><div>145 GMU economist, NIPCC, Author of Fire and Ice (with Dan Gainor)</div><div>www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16507</div><div>PhD 2011 on Portuguese Inquisition economics.gmu.edu/defenses/498,</div><div>146 None of these are/were climate scientists.</div><div>C.3 Books and talks</div><div>Singer published several climate books, on which I commented 147</div><div>“[SIN1999] S. Fred Singer, Hot Talk Cold Science – Global warming’s</div><div>unfinished debate, Revised 2nd Ed, 1999. I originally read this in 2001, at which</div><div>time the disparity between ground stations and (some) satellite results was still a</div><div>legitimate scientific argument.</div><div>[SIN2007] S. Fred Singer, Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming</div><div>every 1,500 years, 2007.</div><div>It is a good exercise to read [SIN1999] first, and see evolution or lack thereof,</div><div>especially in the light of major revisions to satellite and balloon results that</div><div>happened between. In the earlier book, global warming was not happening, in</div><div>the later one, it is inevitable, but natural. Policy advice is constant: no CO2</div><div>restrictions.”</div><div>Singer has often spoken to audiences unlikely to have climate expertise:</div><div>148</div><div>“08/19/09: Minnesota Free Market Institute (MFMI) Minnesota Climate Change</div><div>Symposium:</div><div>www.mnfmi.org/climate</div><div>Keynote by Fred Singer, entitled: “Climate Change: How Politicized Science</div><div>Endangers Prosperity”</div><div>mnfreemarketinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Fred-Singer.pdf</div><div>“Outline: Breakthru: APS to modify Climate Statement” p.2’149</div><div>Singer:</div><div>“Double Breakthrough: This is the first time a professional scientific society has</div><div>agreed to reconsider an alarmist policy statement on climate change. Nature</div><div>magazine published our Letter announcing this fact.</div><div>On 1 May 2009, the APS Council decided to review its current statement via a</div><div>high-level subcommittee of respected senior scientists. We applaud this decision.</div><div>It is the first such reappraisal by a major scientific professional society that we</div><div>are aware of, and we hope it will lead to meaningful change that reflects a more</div><div>balanced view of climate change issues.”</div><div>The APS strongly rejected this at the November 8, 2009 Council meeting.</div><div>
</div><div>147 MAS2010 p.40</div><div>148 MAS2009 p.59. The MFMI is not a science institution.</div><div>149 This claim was quite premature, but it illustrates Singer’s approach. They got</div><div>less than 0.5% of the APS membership to sign a silly petition, but used that for PR</div><div>purposes, often to audiences unfamiliar with the story. In any case, the APS firmly</div><div>rejected their proposal a few months later.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>32</div><div>The reader might check that talk, including quotes by Thomas Jefferson,</div><div>Richard Feynman, John Keynes, and SEEE (a SEPP initiative) – “Draws</div><div>on signers of Oregon petition from VA and NJ” “To educate public…”</div><div>How many Minnesota attendees would be likely to follow up?</div><div>Singer spoke to (mostly) statisticians at Interface 2010, in session150</div><div>created by Ed Wegman and Yasmin Said:</div><div>“Testing the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming: A continuing</div><div>controversy, S. Fred Singer, Science & Environmental Policy Project”</div><div>Petr Chylek151 chaired the Third Santa Fe Conference on Global &</div><div>Regional Climate Change. At one point, according to Judith Curry, Singer</div><div>was an invited speaker,</div><div>152 using material similar to that on a recent</div><div>speaking tour in Europe. This was the original, that disappeared:</div><div>“Invited Presentations</div><div>Singer, Fred</div><div>Is the reported global surface warming of 1978 to 1997 real?153</div><div>Addressing the Disparity between Climate Models and Observations: Testing the</div><div>Hypothesis of AGW”</div><div>154</div><div>These talks were not science, but anti-science. Search this discussion for</div><div>comments by people who attended. According to Mark Boslough:</div><div>155</div><div>‘Petr Chylek stood up after Fred Singer’s presentation (in which Singer</div><div>presented old uncorrected UAH MSU data that suggested cooling) and said</div><div>emphatically, “Denying the warming makes no sense!”’</div><div>Chick Keller (Los Alamos National Laboratory) commented:156</div><div>“F. Singer (SEPP) Is the reported global surface warming of 1979 to 1997</div><div>real? After Rich Muller’s paper157, this was just an embarrassment to Fred.”</div><div>
</div><div>150 MAS2010a, pp.80-91</div><div>151 www.desmogblog.com/petr-chylek</div><div>www.thegwpf.org/opinion-pros-a-cons/218-petr-chylek-open-letter-to-the-climateresearch-community.html</div><div>152 www.webcitation.org/64HUfN9LC, then curry.eas.gatech.edu/santafe</div><div>153 curry.eas.gatech.edu/santafe/papers/Santa%20Fe_Nov_2011-v3.ppt</div><div>154 curry.eas.gatech.edu/santafe/papers/Santa_Fe_Nov_2011_POSTER2.ppt</div><div>155 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/12/climate-cynicism-at-thesanta-fe-conference</div><div>156 www.realclimate.org/?comments_popup=10297#comment-223062</div><div>The general public is easily confused by such talks, where Singer presents</div><div>confusing graphs with total certainty, sometimes leaving little or no time</div><div>for questions. He relied on obsolete data and poor publications,</div><div>unimpressive to expert audiences, to whom he has rarely spoken of late.</div><div>Heartland ICCC’s or free-market groups are friendlier venues.</div><div>Another friendly venue was described 02/07/12 by Eric Berger.</div><div>158 Singer</div><div>again cherry-picked satellite data and said:</div><div>‘Of President Obama’s scientific advisor, John Holdren, he said, “Obama has</div><div>acquired a scientific advisory who is an absolute nut when it comes to global</div><div>warming.”</div><div>Of the climate change scientists whose e-mails were stolen in the Climategate</div><div>controversy, he said the e-mails show, “The people who did the IPCC reports</div><div>were essentially crooks.”’</div><div>Meme-38, IRS-1E. IRS-2E, IRS-3E</div><div>C.4 Articles for general public</div><div>Working scientists do research, write papers for peer-reviewed journals</div><div>and present their work at real science conferences. Some write related</div><div>articles for the broader populace. Singer’s meager output of peer-reviewed</div><div>work is dwarfed by the volume of his OpEds, letters or articles in</div><div>newsletters, blogs or popular press. Analyzing that is beyond the scope of</div><div>this report, but Singer has written often for E&CN, §X.1. IRS-0E</div><div>Those pieces are quite illustrative of Singer’s efforts. E&CN is especially</div><div>useful because Heartland describes its readership in some detail, mostly</div><div>elected officials, very few of whom are likely to have the training to detect</div><div>the cherry-picking, obsolete data or errors. Likewise, the readers of</div><div>American Thinker are unlikely to have such training. IRS-5L</div><div>Singer started 2012 with “Fake! Fake! Fake! Fake!”159</div><div>“But I do claim that the commonly reported and accepted warming between</div><div>1978 and 2000 is based only on thermometers from land surface stations and is</div><div>not supported by any other evidence that I could find. Specifically, ocean data</div><div>
</div><div>157 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Earth_Surface_Temperature</div><div>158 blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/02/fred-singer-the-people-who-did-the-ipccreports-were-essentially-crooks/</div><div>159 www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/fake_fake_fake_fake.html</div><div>www.realclimate.org/?comments_popup=10297#comment-223599 comments</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>33</div><div>(from 71% of the earth's surface) and global atmospheric data (as recorded by</div><div>satellites and independent balloon-borne radiosondes) do not show such a</div><div>warming at all.”</div><div>In 2012, that is simply absurd. Meme-38 Singer still clung to the longrefuted</div><div>errors in satellites and radiosonde balloons, when even Petr Chylek</div><div>told him he was wrong. His most recent article, was “Secondhand Smoke,</div><div>Lung Cancer, and the Global Warming Debate,” Z.2011.02-17.</div><div>C.5 Influence on public opinion?</div><div>The reader unfamiliar with 501(c)(3) rules regarding “education” or</div><div>lobbying might review §0.4. Briefly, communications should be based on</div><div>facts that are not distorted. SEPP’s 990s claim there has been no</div><div>lobbying.160 For 2002-2004 Part III NO was checked for:</div><div>“1.During the year, has the organization attempted to influence national, state, or</div><div>local legislation, including any attempt to influence public opinion on a</div><div>legislative matter or referendum?”</div><div>For 2005-2007 Part VI-B, “Lobbying Activity by Nonelecting …””</div><div>“During the year, did the organization attempt to influence national, state or local</div><div>legislation, including any attempt to influence public opinion on a legislative</div><div>matter or referendum…”</div><div>The answer was always NONE.</div><div>For 2008-2010, Part IV, :Line 4:</div><div>“4 Did the organization engage in lobbying activities?”</div><div>The NO box was checked.</div><div>A small sample of visible actions is: IRS-3E, IRS-5L</div><div>07/08/96 WSJ OpEd: Dangers from the Global Climate Treaty161</div><div>07/11/96 WSJ Letter: Coverup in the Greenhouse162</div><div>07/25/97 WSJ OPEd: A Treaty Built on Hot Air, Not Scientific</div><div>Consensus163</div><div>08/14/02 GMI2002, Letter to President164</div><div>
</div><div>160 The law seems a bit ambiguous, so I do not claim to know the limits.</div><div>161 MAS2010, p.183</div><div>162 ORE2010 pp.2-5, part of the Seitz-organized attack on Ben Santer via OpEds,</div><div>letters, anywhere but in peer-reviewed science itself.</div><div>web.archive.org/web/20070519095232/www.sepp.org/Archive/controv/ipcccont/It</div><div>em05.htm</div><div>163 MAS2010, p.183</div><div>164 MAS2010, p.83</div><div>07/09/09 Letter to Congress165</div><div>08/31/09 A Climate Bill that does Nothing for the Climate166</div><div>10/29/09 Letter to Senate167</div><div>02/08/11 Letter to House of Representatives168</div><div>SEPP’s TWTW newsletter seems geared to influence public opinion.169</div><div>See §W and §X. IRS-0E</div><div>C.6 Summary</div><div>Singer has shown consistent behavior for 2 decades (Fig. E.1):170</div><div>? Occasionally write low-quality technical papers, ignore serious errors.</div><div>? Repeat long-refuted bad arguments again and again.171</div><div>? Write masses of (non-peer-reviewed) material and talks for the public.</div><div>Scientists argue within science constantly. Singer has been generating</div><div>scientific-looking (but often wrong, cherry-picked, etc) materials to</div><div>impress the general public and confuse them about environmental science,</div><div>rather than seriously arguing within science.172</div><div> IRS-0E</div><div>Even ignoring the perjury and possible financial issues, I allege that</div><div>education issues are enough to place SEPP in violation of charity rules</div><div>for most of its history.</div><div>173</div><div>This is not a free speech argument. Singer is free to say what he likes,</div><div>even obvious untruths.174</div><div> He can sell his services as an expert-for-hire or</div><div>do PR. The issue is why such work is in the public is in the public interest</div><div>and deserves the privilege of tax-exemption. I allege that it does not.</div><div>
</div><div>165 MAS2010, p.178</div><div>166 vaseee.org/page2/page2.html This sure seems an attempt to influence public</div><div>opinion on legislation, but maybe this is Fred Singer acting for SEEE, not for</div><div>SEPP. Singer is the founder of VA-SEEE and it has joint meetings with SEPP.</div><div>167 MAS2010, p.180</div><div>168 www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2011/Feb%208%20TWTW.pdf</div><div>169 www.sepp.org/the-week-that-was.cfm Sample a few issues.</div><div>170 ORE2010 explains the longer history before that.</div><div>171 The reader might check that MFMI talk against the wrong memes in</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php</div><div>172 This is quite similar to his 1993 tobacco effort via AdTI and help for TASSC.</div><div>173 The IRS might plausibly have granted this status in 1994, but by now there is a</div><div>very long track record of anti-science. IRS-0E</div><div>174 On IRS forms, to Congress under oath or in court, perjury may be felony.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>34</div><div>E. NIPCC –Council for Tobacco Research reborn?</div><div>Singer has been a key driver of the “NIPCC” reports for Heartland, with</div><div>increasing help from Craig Idso and CSCDGC, §K. NIPCC tries to create</div><div>an alternate science universe , akin to the tobacco industry’s efforts.175</div><div>NIPCC2008 - Nature, Not Human Activity Rules the Climate: The</div><div>Summary for Policies of the Report of NIPCC, April 2008. SEPP</div><div>(Singer, Ed), published by Heartland. 176</div><div> IRS-0E</div><div>The first NIPCC report was funded through Heartland. The flow was:</div><div>(Unknown funders)</div><div>DONORS</div><div>Heartland</div><div>?others ?</div><div>$143K to SEPP in 2007177</div><div> $40K in 2010</div><div>?others?</div><div>Singer shows $143K for SEPP in Fig. A.2.1, but it is unclear if any of that</div><div>money flowed to others. IRS-7F</div><div>Heartland’s 2007 990178 is informative, but often confusing.</div><div>“p.3 Part III.b: Government Relations – Publications and events geared to</div><div>educating and informing local, state and national elected officials about public</div><div>policy issues. $1,791,365.</div><div>“p.15 Part VI-A Lobbying NO LOBBYING”179</div><div>At right is p.17. It is puzzling, since Singer claims to have gotten $143K</div><div>for NIPCC. This shows $135K as “Unrestricted grants to 501(c)(3) and</div><div>others” and only $15K to Singer. NRSP’s website was gone by December</div><div>2008.180 NRSP, NZCSC and ICSC were not legal charities. IRS-10F</div><div>
</div><div>175 PRO2012 pp.257-288. CTR was originally TIRC, Tobacco Industry Research</div><div>Council, which pioneered idea of fake Scientific Advisory Boards (SABs).</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council_for_Tobacco_Research</div><div>176heartland.org/policy-documents/nature-not-human-activity-rules-climate-pdf</div><div>web.archive.org/web/20110610205736/www.heartland.org/policybot/results/2283</div><div>5/Nature_Not_Human_Activity_Rules_the_Climate_pdf.html</div><div>MAS2010, p.87. NIPCC is not science, but anti-science.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/not-the-ipcc-nipcc-report</div><div>177 From 2007 SEPP 990.</div><div>178 207.153.189.83/EINS/363309812/363309812_2007_044DB1FF.PDF</div><div>179Singer has written often for Heartland’s E&CN, §W, i.e., for elected officials.</div><div>180 wayback.archive.org/web/20080801000000/nrsp.com</div><div>After 2008, the NIPCC reports moved to their own website,181 which is</div><div>owned by Heartland,182 but the content is copyrighted by CSCDGC and</div><div>seems to be managed by it.183</div><div>NIPCC2009 - Climate Change Reconsidered, S. Fred Singer and</div><div>Craig Idso; Joseph Bast, Ed 06/02/09 184</div><div> IRS-0E</div><div>Singer shows $40K for “NIPCC Book” §4, A.24.2010. That might be for</div><div>NIPCC2009 or a prepayment for NIPCC2011.</div><div>NIPCC2011 – The 2011 Interim Report, Craig D. Idso, Robert Carter,</div><div>and S. Fred Singer.</div><div>185</div><div> IRS-0E</div><div>Any charity promoting NIPCC as science might be investigated, because</div><div>it is advocacy of fact-distortion.</div><div>
</div><div>181 www.nipccreport.org</div><div>182 www.networksolutions.com/whois-search/nipccreport.org</div><div>183 Perhaps that makes NIPCC seem an independent entity?</div><div>184 www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/2009report.html</div><div>185 www.nipccreport.org/reports/2011/2011report.html </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>35</div><div>A quick NIPCC sample of familiar people, mostly climate fakexperts:</div><div>186</div><div>? Anderson, economics professor at GMU, author Fire and Ice187</div><div>? Armstrong, marketing forecaster at Wharton School, U Pennsylvania</div><div>? Avery, agricultural economist at Hudson Institute</div><div>? Bast, President of Heartland, tobacco advocate, no degree known</div><div>? Battaglia, chemistry professor, author of Green Outside, Red Inside</div><div>? Carter, marine geologist, adjunct researcher at James Cook University</div><div>? Corbyn, meteorologist with a secret forecasting method188</div><div>? Courtney, coal industry scientist and editor</div><div>? Crockford, best-known as researcher of the evolution of dogs</div><div>? D’Aleo, retired TV meteorologist</div><div>? Easterbrook, emeritus geology professor, known for imminent global cooling</div><div>? Goklany, EE and policy analyst at US Dept of Interior</div><div>? Goldberg, mechanical engineer</div><div>? Gray, retired coal industry researcher</div><div>? Haapala, economist, SEPP Exec. VP</div><div>? Hagen, combustion engineer</div><div>? Heiss (dec), rocket scientist</div><div>? Idso, Craig, geographer, Chair of CSCDGC</div><div>? Idso, Sherwood, soil scientist, president of CSCDGC</div><div>? Jaworowski (dec), retired prof of atomic radiation</div><div>? Khandekar, retired Environment Canada scientist</div><div>? Kininmonth, retired meteorologist</div><div>? Labohm, economist</div><div>? Lupo, atmospheric scientist</div><div>? Maccabee, radiation biophysicist,</div><div>? Monckton, UK Viscount, claimed membership in House of Lords</div><div>His presence alone causes a serious credibility problem.</div><div>? Motl, Czech theoretical physicist, string theorist, blogger (not for children)</div><div>? Scafetta, theoretical physicist dedicated to planetary cycles, not CO2</div><div>? Schmitt, geologist/astronaut</div><div>? Segalstad, geologist</div><div>? Soon, astrophysicist at HS CfA, not Harvard U</div><div>? Weber, meteorologist with German Coal Mining Association</div><div>
</div><div>186 www.desmogblog.com/global-warming-denier-database has many of these</div><div>187heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/20560.pdf</div><div>PhD on Portuguese Inquisition, 2011, economics.gmu.edu/defenses/498</div><div>188 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Piers_Corbyn</div><div>Nature certainly did not think much of NIPCC, §N.1. Fine scientists have</div><div>already pointed out numerous flaws189 so this report need not debunk it yet</div><div>again, but focus on the background. NIPCC seems a group of coal</div><div>industry staff, economists, retired meteorologists, geologists, etc, with</div><div>strong ideological views, but rarely much climate science competence. A</div><div>few have made money from climate anti-science. Others may be ecstatic</div><div>that anyone would put their name on these reports.</div><div>The list has few actual climate scientists, as shown by the small number of</div><div>relevant peer-reviewed papers, often quickly refuted, if anyone cared.</div><div>NIPCC membership has no resemblance to normal science. For example,</div><div>AGU is ~¼ female, but only 2 of 56 in NIPCC, Diane Bast and Susan</div><div>Crockford. The demographics are relevant and increasingly studied.</div><div>190</div><div>Fig. E.1 is a dense representation of the contributors to any of the NIPCC</div><div>reports.191</div><div> Those are dark grey, other Heartland items lighter. Their</div><div>activities hint that ideology mattered more than climate expertise.</div><div>? Country</div><div>? Number of peer-reviewed climate science papers found by James Powell192 in</div><div>searching the Web of Science.</div><div>? A set of coded climate anti-science activities, by approximate date.</div><div>Participants likely know each other. Of course Singer likely knows all, as he</div><div>has been involved in most activities. Higher numbers indicate stronger</div><div>involvement. The overall pattern of connections matters more than details.</div><div>? A set of coded organizations that have supported climate anti-science. Codes</div><div>show Tobacco, $Funding shown in [MAS2010], nonprofit, ExxonMobil</div><div>funding. Many people have multiple Heartland connections.</div><div>
</div><div>189 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/not-the-ipcc-nipcc-report</div><div>ourchangingclimate.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/the-nipcc-report/</div><div>Climate scientists Michael Mann and Bart Verheggen comment.</div><div>190 MCC2011 on Conservative White Males, MAS2009 on APS demographics.</div><div>191 MAS2010 pp.92-105 gives similar tables and more explanation.</div><div>192 www.jamespowell.org/page59/page59.html</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/Powell-project.html</div><div>“I searched the Web of Science (WoS), which covers more than 8,000 peerreviewed</div><div>journals, for each skeptic by name, …. counted only primary articles; no</div><div>book reviews, review articles, comments, replies to previously published papers,</div><div>speeches, presentations, conference summaries, etc.… If an article takes a negative</div><div>or explicitly doubtful position on human-caused global warming, I included it.” </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>36</div><div>Fig. E.1 NIPCC People, Activities, Orgs Tobacco, $Funding shown in [MAS2010], nonprofit, ExxonMobil funding Country SkS Ref'd papers</div><div>See Table A.6.2</div><div>in MAS2010 GMI1990 Heidel1992 SIPP1993 Leipzig1995- A.Santer OISM1998 GCSCT US.CONG GMI2002 TII2003 GMI2003 A.Oreskes GMI2005 GMI2005a MIC2005 A.HOCKXX A.Hockey Stock2006 ISPM2007 TGGS2007 BALI2007 Heart#1 Manhat2008 NIPCC2008 GRE2008 Heart#2 CATO2009 APS2009 Heart#3 NIPCC2009 HeartExp#1 Helmer2009 HeartExp#2 EPA#1 A.GATE A.CRU.Parl Heart#4 Heart#5 Heart#6 NIPCC2011 ACSC AdTI AEI AnnapCtr APCO API CATO CEI CFACT CSCDGC E&E FFFF/CSPP FoS Fraser GMI GMU GWPF Heartland Heritage Hudson ICECAP ICSC InstHmn IPA NCPA NRSP NZCSC SciAll SEPP SPPI TASSC TCS TII WCR</div><div>T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T</div><div>$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ? $ $ $</div><div>n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n ? n n</div><div>E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E</div><div>US Anderson, (Robt) Warren 3 3 3 3</div><div>US 1 Armstrong, J.Scott 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3</div><div>US 0 Avery, Dennis 5 5 ? 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 4 4</div><div>US Bast, Diane C. 5 5</div><div>US Bast, Joseph 5 ? 4 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 4</div><div>IT Battaglia, Franco 3 1 3 3</div><div>A U 1 Carter, Robert 5 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 4 5 4 2 3 5 3 4 3 4 3</div><div>GB 0 Corbyn, Piers 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 3</div><div>GB Courtney, Richard 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 3 2 4 3</div><div>CA Crockford,Susan 2 2 3 3 2 3</div><div>US D'Aleo, Joseph 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 1 5 4</div><div>US 1 Easterbrook, Don 2 3 3 2 3 3 3</div><div>US 0 Goklany, Indur 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3</div><div>S E 0 Goldberg, Fred 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3</div><div>NZ 0 Gray, Vincent 1 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 3 3</div><div>US Haapala, Kenneth 3 3 1 3 4 3 4</div><div>US Hagen, David 3 3</div><div>A T Heiss, Klaus P. 3 3 3</div><div>US 3 Idso, Craig 4 2 3 3 3 3 2 5 2 2 3 5 3 3 5 2 4 3 4 3 4</div><div>US 8 Idso, Sherwood 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 5 3 3 3</div><div>P O 0 Jaworowski, Zbiginew 3 2 3 3 3 1 3 2 3 3 2</div><div>E E 0 Karner, Olavi 3 3 3 3</div><div>US Karnick, S.T. 5 4</div><div>US Keen, Richard Alan 1 3 2 3 2 2 3</div><div>CA 0 Khandekar, Madhav 3 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 2 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 4</div><div>A U 1 Kininmonth, William 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3</div><div>NL 1 Labohm, Hans 2 4 2 2 3 3 5 3 2 4 5 3 3 4 3 3</div><div>US Lupo, Anthony R. 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3</div><div>US Maccabee, Howard 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 3</div><div>US Mogil, H. Michael 2 3 3 3</div><div>GB 0 Monckton, Chris.. 5 5 5 3 3 3 4 4 3 2 5 3 3 5 3 4 4</div><div>CZ 0 Motl, Lubos 2 2 3 3 2</div><div>CA Murgatroyd, Stephen 3 3</div><div>US 2 Scafetta, Nicola 3 2 1 3 3 3 3 3</div><div>US 0 Schmitt, Harrison 4 3 3 2 4 3 3 3 4 4</div><div>NO 0 Segalstad, Tom 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3</div><div>US 0 Singer, S. Fred 5 5 5 5 1 4 2 3 4 3 5 ? ? X 3 3 2 4 3 5 3 3 5 3 5 2 5 3 5 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 5 3 4</div><div>US 9 Soon, Willie 5 3 4 4 X 5 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 5 4 3 3</div><div>US Taylor, George H 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 4 3</div><div>US Taylor, Mitch 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 3</div><div>NL 0 Thoenes, Dick 2 3 3 3</div><div>E S Uriarte, Anton 3 2 3 2 3</div><div>DE 0 Weber, Gerd-Rainer 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 2 2 3 2003</div><div>Year, with</div><div>A.HOCKX,</div><div>& A.Hockey ~2006 1990 1992- 1993 1995-- 1996-- 1998- 1998 2001-- 2002 2003 2005-- 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2008 2009 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009-- 2009 2009-- 2010 2010 2010 2011 2011</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>37</div><div>F. Advocacy anti-science - start with tobacco</div><div>Fig. F.1, from [MAS2010, §2] illustrates the flows of money (black)</div><div>through murky mazes to create and distribute anti-science memes (red).193</div><div>Fig. F.1 General flow of money, memes</div><div>
</div><div>193 See DUN2011 for a recent scholarly paper on this topic.</div><div>Think tanks, front groups, PR agencies and lobby groups form distributed</div><div>networks that sometimes cooperate, but also compete for funding by</div><div>touting their accomplishments. Money (black) pays for generation and</div><div>distribution of independent-seeming “memes” which flow (red) to public</div><div>and elected officials. NIPCC, is a fine illustration, §E, Fig. ES-1.</div><div>? Many of these are nonprofits in US or equivalents elsewhere. Some</div><div>combine a tax-advantaged, but lobby-limited 501(c)(3), with a lessadvantaged,</div><div>but less limited 501(c)4, sometimes in same office with</div><div>overlapping staff. (ATR and ATR Foundation work this way).</div><div>? Generally, they claim they do little or no lobbying or equivalents,</div><div>although many are located near Washington, DC’s K-Street.</div><div>? Their 990s almost never reveal “donors” and donation sizes, although</div><div>some kinds of foundations (such family foundations and ExxonMobil</div><div>Foundation) must do so, identifying some money at source.</div><div>? Direct corporate funds are mostly untraceable, except some tobacco.</div><div>? They often describe their own outgoing grants vaguely.</div><div>LTDL is a treasure trove of information on the well-established machinery</div><div>of tobacco anti-science, lately employed by fossil fuel interests and others.</div><div>? The tactics are essentially the same as those suggested by John Hill in</div><div>1954 to manufacture doubt about science.</div><div>194 See §0.7 for more.</div><div>? Murky funding paths are used to generate illusionary independence,</div><div>finding “spokespeople” to speak and write reports, almost never for the</div><div>peer-reviewed literature of science, but for media, OpEds, blogs, etc.</div><div>Fakexperts are widely used, preferably with PhDs.</div><div>? Many groups have been funded by tobacco and fossil interests.</div><div>? Physicist Singer wrote about secondhand smoke. Heartland President</div><div>Joseph Bast speaks on climate, having long gotten tobacco money.</div><div>Is cigarette smoking just an adult freedom-of-choice issue?195</div><div> Tobacco</div><div>vendors have long known they need to set nicotine addiction while</div><div>children’s brains are developing. Smokers often stick with first brands.</div><div>In general, tobacco is a catastrophe,196 but lucrative for its promoters.</div><div>
</div><div>194 ORE2010 covers this in detail for GMI and Singer.</div><div>195 If an adult wants to start smoking, I do not care, but what do readers think of</div><div>people who help tobacco companies damage children?</div><div>196 www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs339/en/index.html Funders</div><div>Org.</div><div>Advocates</div><div>Individual</div><div>Advocates</div><div>For USA audience</div><div>catagories at right,</div><div>see 2009 report below:</div><div>[YAL2009] http://envirocenter.research.yale.edu/uploads/climatechange-6americas62309.pdf</div><div>O1 Corporation O2 Foundation</div><div>B4 Scientist, Field</div><div>B1b Communicator</div><div>Editorial</div><div>O5 Front O7, B1a Political</div><div>B2 Technical</div><div>professional</div><div>O3 PR Agency</div><div>B3 Scientist, other</div><div>B1c Public, convinced</div><div>Uncommitted public</div><div></div><div>O8 Media</div><div>Create,spread</div><div>memes:</div><div>write, speak,</div><div>sign letters.</div><div>A few paid,</div><div>most unpaid.</div><div>PhD (any)</div><div>valued for</div><div>truthiness.</div><div>Finanical - FIN1...5 Reasons (inside gray) Other non-FIN reasons (outside gray)</div><div>Wish low public visibility</div><div>Wish high public visibility</div><div>money</div><div>Memes...</div><div>Key</div><div>+Fees?</div><div>"Big Prizes" O4 Lobby</div><div>+Votes,</div><div>donations</div><div>FIN1</div><div>"Hack"</div><div>(any)</div><div>Doubt, confusion or best, move</div><div>FIN2</div><div>O6 Think Tank</div><div>FIN3</div><div>FIN4</div><div>FIN5</div><div>O9 Blogosphere</div><div>Accept the science,</div><div>at least some need</div><div>to act</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>38</div><div>Fig. F.2 1984~ % smoking starts by age</div><div>RJ Reynolds’ internal</div><div>studies said 69% of adult</div><div>smokers started by 18. One</div><div>can estimate the numbers</div><div>in Figs. F.2 and F.3, by</div><div>assuming smooth curves</div><div>around ages 18 and 24.</div><div>Later results show younger</div><div>starting ages and higher</div><div>teen totals. RJR wrote:</div><div>197</div><div>“Younger adults are the only source of replacement smokers.</div><div>Repeated government studies have shown that:</div><div>• Less than one-third of smokers (31%) start after age 18.</div><div>• Only 5% of smokers start after age 24 .</div><div>Thus, today's younger adult smoking behavior will largely determine the trend of</div><div>Industry volume over the next several decades . If younger adults turn away from</div><div>smoking, the Industry must decline, just as a population which does not give</div><div>birth will eventually dwindle. In such an environment, a positive RJR sales trend</div><div>would require disproportionate share gains and/or steep price increases (which</div><div>could depress volume)</div><div>MARKET SHARE -- THE "FIRST BRAND" ADVANTAGE …”</div><div>“… the average age at which smokers had started smoking had declined over the</div><div>last decade until by 1985 it was around 16.”</div><div>198</div><div>In 1987, RJR started Joe Camel, a superb marketing effort:199</div><div>“A 1991 study … found that by age of six over ninety percent of American kids</div><div>were able to recognize Joe Camel;… about the same name (and face) recognition</div><div>as Mickey Mouse. …</div><div>from the beginning of the blitz in 1987, Camel’s share of the under-eighteen</div><div>market jumped from 0.5 to a whopping 33 percent in just three years.”</div><div>
</div><div>197 “The Importance of Younger Adults,” ~1984. YA means children.</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/eyn18c00/pdf The 6-page memo is instructive.</div><div>www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/stories/memos.htm</div><div>For most, strong nicotine addiction “sets” only during rapid brain development:</div><div>www.newscientist.com/article/dn4163</div><div>198 BAR2007 p.387. The graph above estimated an average of 17, now a bit high.</div><div>199 PRO2012 p.81</div><div>Fig. F.3 % smoking starts, from F.2</div><div>Given the tendency of smokers to stick with their first brand, it is no</div><div>surprise to see a “race to the bottom” to acquire customers first.</div><div>If someone is willing and able to help get children addicted to nicotine, by</div><div>comparison it is child’s play to confuse the public about climate science.</div><div>Many think tanks200 have been involved in anti-science for both tobacco</div><div>and climate, plus other areas where science is inconvenient.</div><div>201</div><div>Tobacco companies’ survival demands addiction of children that will</div><div>kill many, painfully, slowly. Some think tanks sought and got money</div><div>from tobacco companies to help, year after year, tax-free.</div><div>Some numbers are available, just for Philip Morris, on the next page.</div><div>
</div><div>200 These are generally conservative / Libertarian think tanks, but political</div><div>viewpoint does not guarantee participation. The Hoover Institution is certainly</div><div>conservative, but I did not find it much in the tobacco records. It seemed less</div><div>involved in climate anti-science. Hoover Fellow George Shultz was active in the</div><div>fight against a ballot proposition funded by fossil companies Valero, Tesoro and</div><div>Koch Industries. He encourages electric and plug-in-hybrid vehicles and at 90 is</div><div>involved in energy efficiency efforts. All this would seem anathema to many of</div><div>the think tanks whose names appear here often. Some think tanks seem legitimate</div><div>centers of conservative thought, others more like PR agencies/lobbyists.</div><div>Of course, tobacco companies still lobby directly. In California, although</div><div>legislatures are majority Democratic, most tobacco money is given to Republicans.</div><div>www.californiahealthline.org/features/2011/smokers-politicians-struggle-withtobacco-habit.aspx</div><div>and by the way, I’m a lifelong independent.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_P.Shultz; www.hoover.org/fellows/10657</div><div>ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_23,the_Suspension_of_A</div><div>B_32%282010%29</div><div>201 PRO1995, Ch.5; PRO2012, BRA20078, ORE2010</div><div>0.0</div><div>2.0</div><div>4.0</div><div>6.0</div><div>8.0</div><div>10.0</div><div>12.0</div><div>14.0</div><div>16.0</div><div>1 0 15 2 0 25 3 0</div><div>Estimate by:</div><div>a) Assuming smooth curve</div><div>b) Matching 69% & 95% points</div><div>c) Assuming few start before 12</div><div>or after 28.</div><div>Race to the bottom!</div><div>People often stick to brand.</div><div>Get them early! 18 is too late.</div><div>Now:</div><div>13-14</div><div>peak</div><div>1984 RJR MEMO % Age % Cum %</div><div>12 3.0 3.0</div><div>"31% after 18" 13 6.0 9.0</div><div>means 69% before 19 14 12.0 21.0</div><div>15 15.0 36.0</div><div>16 15.0 51.0</div><div>17 10.0 61.0</div><div>69 18 8.0 69.0</div><div>19 6.3 75.3</div><div>"31% after 18 and 5% after 24" 20 5.0 80.3</div><div>means 26% from 19 to 24 21 4.5 84.8</div><div>22 4.0 88.8</div><div>23 3.5 92.3</div><div>26 24 2.8 95.0</div><div>25 2.0 97.0</div><div>26 1.5 98.5</div><div>27 1.0 99.5</div><div>5 28 0.5 100.0</div><div>TOTAL 100.0</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>39</div><div>Fig. F.4 Philip Morris 1991-2001 funding</div><div>m:MAS2010, 501(c)(3, 4, 6), State $1,000s P: Figure F.5 on next page samples efforts for PM. *: Roy Marden-1995 accounts</div><div>X Code Name (GMU-related underlined) 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Totals P *</div><div>3 MI Acton Acton Institute for Study of Religion&Liberty 10 10 10 10 12 52 P *</div><div>m 3 NH AdTI Alexis de Tocqueville Institute 10 50 75 75 50 260 P *</div><div>m 3 DC AEI American Enterprise Inst 25 60 25 10 0 100 100 25 25 50 420 P *</div><div>m 3 DC ALEC American Legislative Exchange Council 46 10 21 50 6 133 P</div><div>3 VA AmPolFnd American Policy Foundation 20 50 50 50 170 P</div><div>m 3 MD AnnapCtr Annapolis Center 25 20 25 20 25 115</div><div>3 VA ASF American Spectator Foundation 45 25 25 95 P</div><div>m 3 DC ATLAS Atlas Economic Research Foundation 475 25 75 50 625 P *</div><div>m 4,3 DC ATR Americans for Tax Reform 175 380 60 125 435 110 100 1,385 P *</div><div>3 DC CapResCtr Capital Research Center 50 25 25 50 60 40 10 10 10 10 290 *</div><div>3 OR Cascade Cascade Policy Institute 5 2 3 3 12</div><div>m 3 DC CATO CATO Institute 10 20 20 40 150 175 175 100 100 100 75 965 P</div><div>m 3 DC CEI Competitive Enterprise Institute 10 50 150 200 200 125 25 45 45 45 895 P *</div><div>3 CA Claremont Claremont Institute for Study of States. Pol. 1 40 25 25 25 20 25 30 25 216 P *</div><div>m 3 DC CMPA Center Media Public Affairs (GMU) 25 25 50</div><div>m 3 PA Comnwlt Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy 2 1 3 5</div><div>3 DC DPR Defenders of Property Rights 30 45 20 20 20 20 155 P</div><div>m 3,4 VA FF Frontiers of Freedom 35 100 105 25 25 27 50 367 P *</div><div>m 3 DC GMI George Marshall Institute (none here, but Seitz was long involved with tobacco companies; ORE2010, PRO2012)</div><div>m 3 VA GMU George Mason University (law school) 10 10 85 10 10 10 10 10 10 165 *</div><div>m 3 IL Heartland Heartland Institute 50 50 65 70 50 25 30 25 30 395 P *</div><div>m 3 DC Heritage Heritage Foundation 40 40 50 50 50 50 53 50 50 50 50 533 P *</div><div>m 3 DC Hudson Hudson Institute 100 25 25 25 25 200 P *</div><div>3 DC IndWom Independent Women's Forum 15 5 5 5 5 35 P</div><div>3 VA InstJust Institute for Justice 20 10 10 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 180 P</div><div>3 MI Mackinac Mackinac Center for Public Policy 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 15 15 120 P</div><div>m 3 NY Manhattan Manhattan Institute 25 25 25 25 0 25 20 10 10 10 20 195 P *</div><div>m 3 VA Mercatus Mercatus Ctr (GMU) 10 10 20</div><div>6 DC NAM National Assoc, Manufacturers 130 130 130 390 P *</div><div>3 TX NCPA National Center for Policy Analysis 25 45 45 45 60 60 50 25 25 25 25 430 P *</div><div>3 DC NCPPR National Center for Public Policy Research 50 25 30 25 35 165 P *</div><div>m 3 CA PLF Pacific Legal Foundation 22 25 10 10 21 19 5 5 10 127 *</div><div>m 3 CA PRI Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy 25 30 50 50 56 50 20 20 25 25 351 P *</div><div>m 3 CA Reason Reason Foundation 25 10 20 25 25 20 20 20 20 20 205 P *</div><div>3 VA StatePol State Policy Network 10 10 *</div><div>m 3 MD TASSC The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition 200 200 P</div><div>m 3 CA TII The Independent Institute ` 10 10</div><div>3 TX TPPF Texas Public Policy Foundation 25 25 50 P</div><div>m 3 DC WLF Washington Legal Foundation 250 275 200 260 300 200 1,485 P *</div><div>italicized: possibly inconsistent/proposed Totals 318 355 546 650 1,904 1,920 1,709 818 1,318 1,009 928 11,474</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>40</div><div>Fig. F.4 lists some tobacco-funded entities, many also relevant to climate</div><div>anti-science. It was gathered from partial and sometimes contradictory</div><div>data202 and illustrates payment only through PM,203 not RJR or others.</div><div>Some higher numbers come from next page. They might seek funding, by</div><div>promoting their capabilities and asking for more support.</div><div>What did they do for their funding?</div><div>An LTDL excerpt is shown at right:204 plus a few more samples.</div><div>These think tanks neither do medical research nor act to help smoking</div><div>cessation nor are visible charities like theatre or arts groups. Can the</div><div>reader imagine anything such advocacy organizations would do for Philip</div><div>Morris that would actually be in the public interest and thus qualify them</div><div>as public charities? Tactics are found in §0.7.</div><div>Does the reader think real “research and education” were funded by the</div><div>tobacco companies? IRS-0E The science was already mostly settled well</div><div>enough in the 1950s, and even for secondhand smoke by1990.205</div><div>Might they have funded advocacy, disinformation and lobbying by taxadvantaged</div><div>entities that seemed “independent?” IRS-5L</div><div>
</div><div>202legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yqs75c00 Overview of tobacco helpers</div><div>1991-1995 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/whm88h00</div><div>1995 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/clw67h00</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lth97g00 earlier(?) version</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dlw67h00 earlier(?) version</div><div>1996 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pdq90b00 note (c3) vs (c4) categories</div><div>1997 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qwi82c00 especially useful</div><div>1998 “1999 proposed Budget” has column “1999 Budget”, likely typo for 1998:</div><div>www.pmdocs.com/pdf/2072085156_5163_zuwg3b55idh5h5ma2cuw4a55.pdf</div><div>For some reason, cannot find Bates 2072085156 at UCSF.</div><div>1999 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oqe79h00/pdf (in 2000 proposed)</div><div>2000 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/frg99h00</div><div>2001 Proposed budget, unable to find 2001 actual:</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/frg99h00/pdf</div><div>The reader who searches www.pmdocs.com is warned to make copies of PDFs</div><div>because it returns temporary URLs, not permanent ones.</div><div>203 GMU and related entities are underlined. ASF is included for MAS2011f.</div><div> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altria</div><div>204</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/coa85c00/pdf</div><div>205 PRO2012 p.285 on CTR grantees who themselves thought so.</div><div>Fig. F.5 What did think tanks do for PM?</div><div>(includes notes on next page)</div><div>Some specific examples of particular relevance are:</div><div>Heartland:</div><div>“Blast faxes to state legislators, off-the-record briefings…” IRS-5L</div><div>NCPA:</div><div>“…access to GW Bush” (then Governor of Texas) IRS-5L</div><div>This essentially was a well-organized astroturf and lobbying operation,</div><div>mobilizing the various think tanks to affect public opinion and legislation.</div><div>It includes LTEs (Letters to Editor) and more direct contacts with</div><div>legislators. Presumably, Marden contacted the think tanks, asked them</div><div>what they could do for PM and they negotiated these actions.</div><div>The notes on following page should be considered part of Fig. F.5. They</div><div>pick up other interactions, including some RJR payments.,</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>41</div><div>Numbers in Fig. F.4 are clearly lower bounds for PM funding., PM</div><div>sometimes made payments that did not show up in the dense lists and the</div><div>RJR payments never appeared in any convenient lists. Payments can take</div><div>form of conference or dinner sponsorships that may not appear elsewhere.</div><div>A useful list is that of Roy Marden’s Major Group Affiliations206</div><div>Acton, AdTI, Heritage207</div><div>ALEC; 208 ALEC, AEI;</div><div>209 AEI210</div><div>American Policy Foundation211</div><div>American Spectator Foundation212</div><div>Atlas,</div><div>213 CEI214</div><div>Defenders of Property Rights215</div><div>Evergreen Freedom Foundation (often in LTDL, no funding so far)216</div><div>GMU217</div><div>
</div><div>206 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ygs57c00</div><div>207 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mbn97d00</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/opy41b00 AdTI</div><div>208 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qji97c00 1989 RJR $1K to ALEC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/iui57d00/pdf 1993 PM: $46 to ALEC,</div><div>“We share a common commitment to dedicated public service.”</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gdl40d00 1993 RJR $37K to ALEC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ovg39b00 1994 Tobacco Institute to ALEC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qcl40d00 1994 $10K invoice for conference to PM</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/udl40d00 1995 RJR $25K to ALEC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ncl40d00 1998 RJR $2.5K to ALEC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/izk86c00 1999 PM $5.5K to ALEC, dinner</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uiy82c00 1999 letter ALEC to US Senators</div><div>209 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/paz34a99 1997 B&W $5K to ALEC, $7.5K to AEI</div><div>210 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lqv63c00 1994 AEI, p.20, teenage smoking for RJR</div><div>211 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fez32e00 1992 EPA Watch, secondhand smoke</div><div>212 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cca95c00 1998 PM $4.5K to ASF for dinner</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cca95c00 1998 ASF article decrying tobacco law</div><div>213 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cca95c00 1998 grant request, set up Latin America</div><div>214 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wsn04e00 1994 CEI attacks EPA secondhand smoke</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hdl88h00 1994 CEI thanks PM for $150K</div><div>215</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hdn93c00 1995 proposal</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hdn93c00 1997 DPR testimony, search for tobacco</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qph82a00 2000 DPR disclose cigarette data wrong</div><div>216 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/twt07d00 1996 EFF asks for money (via Fritz)</div><div>217 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zgq63b00 1985 Tollison to OMB: will cost $500M</div><div>losses to government to restrict smoking in its offices.</div><div>Hudson Institute218</div><div>Independent Women’s Forum219</div><div>Institute for Justice220</div><div>NCPPR,</div><div>221 PLF222</div><div>TASSC223 Fig. F.4 captures little of the funding that must have occurred,</div><div>but came from different budgets not yet found</div><div>Texas Public Policy Foundation224</div><div>
</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ezc30g00 1990 GMU Professor Robert Tollison,</div><div>Center for Study of Public Choice, letter to Tobacco Institute</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ivf00a99 1994 Tollison goes to Australia to talk about</div><div>(economic) benefits of smoking.</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rjc13b00 1998 James T. Bennett, economics, GMU</div><div>218 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qph30d00 Michael Horowitz</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jdh45d00 Michael Horowitz</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jdh45d00 1996 Public Citizen about the industry</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/aow83b00 PM talks of recruiting authors like Tom</div><div>Clancy or Robert Ludlum and other speakers, such as Kevin Hopkins of Hudson,</div><div>Tollison of GMU, Richard Wagner, Economics Chair @ GMU, many others.</div><div>219 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qph30d00 1999 IWF to PM</div><div>“Philip Morris has been a friend to IWF in the past for good reason . (Two years</div><div>ago you gave us a $15,000 grant) . After all, who 'ya gonna call when you need</div><div>a sensible, intelligent woman's voice? Your yearly support can keep us</div><div>competitive in the marketplace of ideas . For this important junk science project,</div><div>please help with a gift of $20,000 to underwrite our work in the press to counter</div><div>the nonsense and stifle the litigation frenzy.”</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/sck27a00 1998 PM: B. McKittrick</div><div>“Lunch with Independent Women's Forum to discuss sound science forum”.</div><div>220 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rjc13b00 1995 IfJ to PM’s Roy Marden</div><div>221</div><div> /legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/rta21c00 1999 Tobacco Lawsuit is bad</div><div>222 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/opy41b00</div><div>223</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fsu57d00 1994 PM TASSC</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ygs57c00 1995 TASSC activities, APCO</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ynk73c00 PM: really, TASSC is independent</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ejm91d00/pdf Milloy to B&W; Bonner Cohen</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ejm91d00/pdf Talk with Singer, “TASSC Europe”</div><div>224</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/heb73c00 1998 “We have had a close relationship</div><div>with them for many years . Per Neal's operation, they have done a lot of work on</div><div>issues that we deem important . We are a longtime financial supporter. In the past,</div><div>we have paid them out of the tort budget.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>42</div><div>§B.1 mentioned Singer’s involvement with tobacco, AdTI, TII and</div><div>TASSC225, but focus now shifts to Heartland, for which tobacco has been</div><div>far more consistently lucrative. Heartland cooperated often with Philip</div><div>Morris people, especially Roy Marden. Tina Wall wrote to Joe Bast,</div><div>03/06/96: 226</div><div>“Thank you for the news on the ALEC model legislation program.</div><div>Roy mentioned this project to me too and his participation on the board.”</div><div>Marden sent PM-internal email 04/22/97:227</div><div>“Mike DeBow of the Alabama AGs office and co-author of the Task Force</div><div>report presented the results of that report in a paper to the Association for</div><div>Private Enterprise Education (APEE) weekend before last. He has agreed to</div><div>have The Heartland Institute, an Illinois-based policy group with which we</div><div>work, publish a 24-page summary of the report/paper as a policy study. This will</div><div>be released late next week, with a distribution of at least 3000 (half journalists,</div><div>the remainder state Constitutional officers and business types) . Heartland</div><div>would be willing to do a full run of 10,000 (which would include every state</div><div>legislator and Member of Congress) if they can get the funding for the 7000</div><div>differential . I am getting faxed later what this will cost ... . and I think we</div><div>should consider this.” IRS-5L</div><div>The reader might compare that with Heartland claims from 2000:228</div><div>“Heartland does not conduct contract research. This means we do not agree to</div><div>conduct research or write commentaries in return for payment by an interested</div><div>party.”</div><div>There may have never been a specific contract to write that report, but a</div><div>think tank might remind a funder of past efforts when asking for money</div><div>next year. PM certainly reviewed funding every year.</div><div>Most such requests were likely done verbally or via non-public letters or</div><div>emails. §G.1 gives a rare public example of a begging letter, from Bast to</div><div>Marden. Of course, it helps to have an actively-engaged Board member</div><div>who has corporate money to spend. Much information need not ever be</div><div>written where it might become public.</div><div>
</div><div>225 MAS2010 p.76, www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=TASSC</div><div>Singer’s book “Hot Talk, Cold Science” was published by TII, also in list.</div><div>226</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kll57d00/pdf</div><div>227</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ayq76c00/pdf</div><div>228 web.archive.org/web/20000304223313/ heartland.org/about/funding.htm</div><div>Marden sent email 07/16/99:229</div><div>“From: Harden, Roy- Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 4:05 PM</div><div>To: Scruggs, John; Cc: Gomez, Frank; Walls, Tina’ Subject: Conference call…</div><div> I've contacted Larry Reed, president of the Mackinac Center in Midland, MI,</div><div>who perviously wrote a backgrounder on the issue & contacted fed & st</div><div>legislators in MI. He knows Abraham230 well, & before cob today is sending him</div><div>a note to "encourage him to do the right thing". He will also follow up w/a call</div><div>@ the beginning of the wk. Reed also appeared on radio station WBCK-Battle</div><div>Creek for an hr this am to talk about the issue.* I serve on the Heartland Institute</div><div>(IL) Board w/Jim Fitzgerald, Peter's231 brother. I &/or the Heartland president</div><div>are following up w/Jim; the president knows Peter well & will be calling</div><div>him this afternoon. IRS-5L</div><div>* I have a call in to NAM232 to ask them to follow up w/House Apps.”</div><div>Roy Marden started on Heartland’s Board no later than 1996 and remained</div><div>through September 2008 (E&CN).</div><div>233 He certainly was “actively engaged.”</div><div>Post-2001 Tobacco funding is unknown.</div><div>Would the reader guess that it continued for years or not?</div><div>Even ignoring plausible off-record lobbying, Heartland’s</div><div>E&CN offered frequent tobacco-supportive articles and</div><div>advertisements, §W4.1. The first lines list 13 smokingrelated</div><div>articles and 8 advertisements, “Smokers Lounge” or</div><div>“Do you smoke?” See Z.2006.05-6 for example.</div><div>Z.2008.07-8 shows “Best Available Scientific Evidence</div><div>Shows Secondhand Smoke Is No Danger”</div><div>Why exactly do such appear in E&CN?</div><div>They might reflect tobacco funding or perhaps gain smoker sympathy for</div><div>other issues. “The EPA is unfair to smokers.” might be generalized, as</div><div>Joseph Bast did in “Joe Camel is Innocent!” excerpted later.</div><div>
</div><div>229</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mdf89h00/pdf</div><div>230 I do not yet know who this is.</div><div>231 That seems to be Peter Fitzgerald, a US Senator at the time:</div><div> bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=f000442</div><div>232 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zqs75c00/pdf PM considered NAM an ally and</div><div>usually had a senior executive on its Board.</div><div>233heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/23410.pdf Marden does not appear on the 2008 990, so he plausibly</div><div>departed by YE2008.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>43</div><div>G. Heartland Institute funding and elected officials</div><div>G.1 Joseph Bast defends Joe Camel, wants $</div><div>The Heartland Institute234 is a 501(c)(3) think tank run by Joseph Bast,</div><div>235</div><div>both mentioned often in LTDL.</div><div>236</div><div> SourceWatch offers an extensive</div><div>writeup.237</div><div> IRS-5L</div><div>Fig. F.4 earlier illustrates persistent funding, but does not capture the</div><div>interactions seen elsewhere, as Bast tried to grow his business.</div><div>In 1996, Bast touted Heartland’s network to Philip Morris:</div><div>“As you may know, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)</div><div>recently gave The Heartland Institute permission to make its model legislation</div><div>available through PolicyFax, Heartland’s fax-on-demand information service.</div><div>This means that 8,000 elected national and state officials will have instant free</div><div>access, by fax, to all 250 model bills and resolutions.”</div><div>238</div><div>Philip Morris reported key actions of Heartland in 1999:</div><div>“Blast faxes to state legislators, off-the record briefings, op-eds, radio.” 239</div><div>Heartland’s 990s asserted that it did no lobbying.</div><div>240</div><div>Bast wrote to Roy Marden241 of Philip Morris, OCR’ d from 07/27/99:242</div><div>
</div><div>234 heartland.org</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute READ THIS</div><div>235 Bast studied economics at U Chicago, but apparently did not earn a degree.</div><div>Nevertheless, he labels himself a “global warming expert,” G.4. I’d say fakexpert.</div><div>236legacy.library.ucsf.edu/action/search/basic;jsessionid=32629767E12AE370F60</div><div>5DE78195FF4CE.tobacco03?fd=0&q=heartland+institute</div><div>legacy.library.ucsf.edu/action/search/basic?fd=0&q=joseph+bast</div><div>237 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute_and_tobacco</div><div>238 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/action/document/page?tid=lll57d00</div><div>However, Heartland 990s say no money is spent on lobbying.</div><div>239 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/boa85c00 Presumably Heartland got paid.</div><div>That document lists organizations, whose activities seem like lobbying.</div><div>MAS2010 pp.93-95. Most promote climate anti-science as well as tobacco.</div><div>240 www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163392,00.html</div><div>www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163393,00.html What does the reader think?</div><div>241 Marden was on Heartland’s Board through Sept 2008, at least.</div><div>heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/</div><div>pdfs/23410.pdf</div><div>“Mr. Roy Marden</div><div>Manager of Industry Affairs</div><div>Philip Morris Management Cos.</div><div>120 Park Avenue</div><div>New York, NY 10017</div><div>Dear Roy:</div><div>Thank you for inviting me to request renewed general operating support for The</div><div>Heartland Institute for 1999. I note that Philip Morris contributed $5,000 last</div><div>August (for a Gold Table at our annual benefit) and $25,000 in October (general</div><div>operating support). It also has allowed you to serve on our Board of Directors,</div><div>which has produced many positive results for the entire organization.</div><div>Because Heartland does many things that benefit Philip Morris' bottom line,</div><div>things that no other organization does, I hope you will consider boosting your</div><div>general operating support this year to $30,000 and once again reserve a Gold</div><div>Table for an additional $5,000.</div><div>We genuinely need your financial support. Maybe by the end of this letter you'll</div><div>agree that we merit even greater support; I certainly hope so.</div><div>Working with State Elected Officials</div><div>Unlike any other free-market think tank, Heartland's primary audience is the</div><div>nation's 7,500 state elected officials. We reach them more often, and generate</div><div>from them more requests for research, than any other think tank in the</div><div>country.</div><div>? PolicyFax, Heartland's free fax-on-demand information service for journalists</div><div>and elected officials, received approximately 700 calls a month from state</div><div>legislators and members of their staffs during 1998.</div><div>? Over 110 elected state officials now serve on the PolicyFax Advisory Board,</div><div>meaning they have volunteered to help choose documents and topics to</div><div>feature on the service. Among pro-market groups, only ALEC has more state</div><div>legislators involved in their programs.</div><div>? Every state and national elected official in the U.S. receives a steady stream of</div><div>publications from Heartland - four periodicals and less regular mailings of</div><div>policy studies and other documents - that have been designed to fill their</div><div>information needs. Heartland is one of very few organizations that treats</div><div>elected officials as customers, not opponents.</div><div>
</div><div>242 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jvy82i00/pdf</div><div>A sample is</div><div>shown in a</div><div>few pages.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>44</div><div>Supporting State-Based Think Tanks</div><div>Heartland works with ALEC and the State Policy Network to support</div><div>conservative and freemarket think tanks around the country. Heartland does</div><div>as much as either of these organizations to support the state-based think tank</div><div>movement. For example:</div><div>? PolicyFax features 6,000 documents from some 300 think tanks and advocacy</div><div>groups, including all of the members of State Policy Network. PolicyFax is</div><div>free for both the users and the groups that provide documents, and Heartland</div><div>reports back to the publisher each month with information about how often its</div><div>documents were ordered.</div><div>? Heartland's Intellectual Ammunition is the only magazine sent to all 8,000</div><div>state and national elected officials featuring the work of free-market policy</div><div>analysts on the staffs of Heritage, NCPA, CEI, the Tax Foundation, Reason</div><div>Foundation, Center for the Study of American Business, and other think tanks.</div><div>? Issues of three Heartland publications - the bimonthly Intellectual</div><div>Ammunition and monthly School Reform News and Environment News -</div><div>contain directories of freemarket groups and feature the work of other think</div><div>tanks. Heartland is the only organization in the country that regularly</div><div>promotes the work of other think tanks.</div><div>Work on Tobacco-related Issues</div><div>Heartland has devoted considerable attention to defending tobacco (and other</div><div>industries) from what I view as being an unjust campaign of public demonization</div><div>and legal harassment. We're an important voice defending smokers and their</div><div>freedom to use a still-legal product.</div><div>? Tobacco is well represented on PolicyFax and in the quarterly PolicyFax</div><div>Updates. In recent months we posted Brill's Content's expose of EPA's corrupt</div><div>science on secondhand smoke and essays by Patrick Reilly for Capital</div><div>Research Center, Jacob Sullum for Reason Foundation, Matt Kibbe for CSE,.</div><div>J.D. Foster for the Tax Foundation, and Sean Paige for Insight. Some 21</div><div>articles on tobacco are available through PolicyFax.</div><div>? • Intellectual Ammunition has carried two articles defending the tobacco</div><div>industry since last October: the cover story of the March! April 1999 issue</div><div>("Lifting the Skirts of 'Progressive' Demonizers") and my essay, "Dear</div><div>Melissa: A Civil Libertarian's Perspective on the War against Smoking."</div><div>? The Heartlander, our monthly newsletter for members, has called attention to</div><div>the dangerous legal precedents and discriminatory taxes that are part of the</div><div>campaign against tobacco in cover essays appearing in the October,</div><div>November, and June issues.</div><div>? Recent and past Heartland publications on tobacco, including a Heartland</div><div>Policy Study and several Perspectives, and the 21 documents on the subject</div><div>available from PolicyFax, are all available on Heartland's Web site.</div><div>Particularly popular are two of my essays, titled "Five Lies About Tobacco"</div><div>and "Joe Camel is Innocent."</div><div>Coming Up</div><div>We expect to continue publishing School Reform News, Environment News,</div><div>Intellectual Ammunition, and The Heartlander in the months ahead. Changing</div><div>PolicyFax from a fax.-on demand service to an Internet-based service begins this</div><div>week with the conversion of all 6,000 documents available from PolicyFax into a</div><div>format that will enable them to be viewed or downloaded directly from the Web</div><div>site.</div><div>We are also revamping our Web site to bring together into one place all the</div><div>material on tobacco - the policy study, op-eds, PolicyFax documents, and</div><div>Heartlander essays - and identify it as the "Smoker's Lounge"243 on the</div><div>homepage. And we have discussed producing an Instant Expert Guide to Tobacco</div><div>Litigation and reproducing an analysis done of the effect of a federal lawsuit</div><div>against the tobacco industry on the level of payments states can expect to receive.</div><div>Both of these projects are likely to come about in the coming months (though the</div><div>latter only if it is still timely).</div><div>Funding Request</div><div>Roy, please consider renewing Philip Morris' general operating support of The</div><div>Heartland Institute at the slightly higher level of $30,000. We rely heavily on</div><div>companies like yours to produce a program that is every bit as ambitious and</div><div>perhaps more effective than anything produced by a Washington D.C.-based</div><div>group.</div><div>Please don't hesitate to give me a call if you have questions or advice. I hope to</div><div>hear from you soon .”</div><div>In marketing terms, Bast was lauding Heartland’s coverage of state and</div><div>local officials, as competitive advantage versus Washington, DC think</div><div>tanks, some of whom had obtained substantially higher funding. As a</div><div>businessman, he was competing for that funding.</div><div>Bast’s “Five Lies” and “Joe Camel is Innocent” are excerpted next.</div><div>
</div><div>243 Some excerpts from the 20007 Smoker’s Lounge are shown shortly.</div><div>Nonpartisan?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>45</div><div>“Joe Camel is Innocent! 244 IRS-0E</div><div>Joseph Bast – Joseph L. Bast – August 21, 1996</div><div>... On behalf of the 25 percent of the adult population</div><div>that smokes, may I offer a few words in defense of</div><div>smoking? …</div><div>According to both Wills and Jennings, the fact that</div><div>"Joe Camel" is a cartoon somehow proves that</div><div>Camels' manufacturer, R.J. Reynolds, is targeting</div><div>kids. But cartoons are used to pitch scores of</div><div>products that could only be of use to adults. Last time</div><div>I checked, people under the age of 18 weren't major</div><div>buyers of life insurance, household cleaners,</div><div>automobile rustproofing, or tires--yet Snoopy, Mr.</div><div>Clean, Rusty Jones, and the Michelin Man are used to promote those products.</div><div>Joe Camel is innocent!</div><div>Wills and Jennings also claim that FDA regulation of cigarettes is opposed by</div><div>Republicans because they receive campaign contributions from the tobacco</div><div>industry. But it is more likely that the campaign contributions go to</div><div>Republicans because they have been leading the fight against the use of</div><div>"junk science" by the FDA and its evil twin, the Environmental Protection</div><div>Agency (EPA). With respect to smoking, there's plenty of evidence--including a</div><div>recent study by the Congressional Research Service--that sound science</div><div>concerning the health effects of "second-hand smoke" doesn't support the claims</div><div>being made by EPA245 and FDA. … ”</div><div>Harvard Professor of the History of Medicine Allan M. Brandt</div><div>246 offers</div><div>clear evidence that RJ Reynolds developed the Joe Camel campaign to</div><div>appeal to children. Examples from pages of discussion include:</div><div>“In 1986, Camel had less than 3 percent of the underage market; by 1993 it had</div><div>at least 13 percent.” p.9</div><div>“From the inception of this campaign, few observers doubted that Joe Camel</div><div>was designed to appeal to young (perhaps very young) smokers.” p.387</div><div>
</div><div>244 heartland.org/editorial/1996/08/21/joe-camel-innocent</div><div>245 See §B.1 for Singer contribution to anti-EPA campaign.</div><div>246 BRA2007 especially pp. 7-10, 386-391, 432, 494, but Joe Camel is mentioned</div><div>elsewhere. See also PRO2012. For those unfamiliar with Joe Camel images, see:</div><div>www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1568&bih=879&q=j</div><div>oe+camel&gbv=2&oq=joe+camel&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=127</div><div>0l2277l0l2548l9l7l0l0l0l0l203l829l2.4.1l7l0</div><div>“July 1998: Five Lies about Tobacco;The Tobacco Bill Wasn’t about</div><div>Kids.</div><div>Joseph Bast – Joseph L. Bast – July 1, 1998</div><div>On June 17, 43 Republicans and 3 Democrats in the U.S. Senate voted to kill a</div><div>bill that would have raised taxes on cigarettes by $1.10 per pack and restricted</div><div>cigarette advertising. That this was a major victory for the tobacco industry has</div><div>been widely reported. Less widely noted, however, is the victory for truth and</div><div>freedom against the corrupt tactic of the Big Lie. …</div><div>It Isn't about Kids</div><div>Finally, the biggest lie of all is that the tobacco bill was about saving our</div><div>children from the health risks of tobacco. If that was really its purpose, the bill</div><div>would have concentrated on enforcing current laws against juvenile smoking. As</div><div>Patrick Buchanan correctly asks, "How does robbing a working-class couple of</div><div>$1,200 a year keep teenagers from smoking?" Where is the logic in increasing</div><div>taxes on all buyers of a legal product in order to discourage purchases by a tiny</div><div>minority?</div><div>The evidence that tobacco companies target teenagers is hardly convincing.</div><div>Internal memos and letters disclosed during litigation show that marketing to</div><div>kids was discussed, but not that the tactic was adopted as corporate policy.…247</div><div>Those who opposed the tobacco bill were also unconcerned about its effects on</div><div>kids. Republicans, after nearly two years of joining in the tobacco-bashing</div><div>festivities, reversed course to pacify their party's conservative wing and to</div><div>distinguish themselves from tax-and-spend Democrats. Conservative pundits</div><div>opposed the bill because they feared it would lead to persecution of consumers</div><div>of alcohol, caffeine, and fast foods, and users of guns, automobiles, and fill-inthe-blank.</div><div>The tobacco industry fought the bill simply</div><div>to avoid extinction.”</div><div>248</div><div>To avoid extinction they addict children to</div><div>something that will eventually kill many of them.</div><div>249</div><div>Joseph Bast wrote what he could to support them and</div><div>then cited those articles to increase his funding.</div><div>250</div><div>
</div><div>247 PRO2012 pp,71-83. Stanford’s Robert N. Proctor also covers this in detail in</div><div>his new book. The evidence is in the archives and on the shelves.</div><div>248 heartland.org/policy-documents/july-1998-five-lies-about-tobacco-tobacco-billwasnt-about-kids</div><div>249 After Joe Camel’s demise, RJ Reynolds created candy-flavored cigarettes (not</div><div>candy cigarettes), such as Twista Lime, Kauai Kolada, etc as in sample ad.</div><div>chicagoist.com/2006/10/12/say_goodbye_to_twista_lime_cigarettes.php</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>46</div><div>Welcome to Heartland’s Smoker’s Lounge!251</div><div> (brief excerpts) IRS-0E</div><div>Maureen Martin and Joseph L. Bast – April 20, 2007</div><div>‘Welcome to the Smoker’s Lounge, the place to go for sound science,</div><div>economics, and legal commentary on tobacco issues. This “issue suite” cuts</div><div>through the propaganda and exaggeration of anti-smoking groups by giving you</div><div>access to the best available research and commentary from scores of</div><div>independent research organizations, publications, and government sources.</div><div>This essay presents an overview of the controversy over tobacco control, with</div><div>links to documents in HTML and PDF formats available from PolicyBot, the free</div><div>electronic clearinghouse of free-market research and commentary that also</div><div>resides on The Heartland Institute’s Web site.</div><div>New! An Entire Book Available Online!</div><div>In July 2006, The Heartland Institute published Please Don’t Poop in My Salad--</div><div>a collection of essays and presentations written by Heartland President Joseph</div><div>Bast during the past several years concerning taxes and regulations imposed on</div><div>tobacco and its consumers. …</div><div>Thousands of copies of the book have been distributed to elected officials at the</div><div>annual meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, National</div><div>Conference of State Legislatures, Council of State Governments, and National</div><div>League of Cities. Hundreds have been distributed to tobacco retailers in the</div><div>metropolitan Chicago area, including Jack Schwartz Fine Cigars, Up Down</div><div>Tobacco, Marshall McGearty Tobacco Lounge, Old Chicago Smoke Shop, and</div><div>Old English Pipe Shop. …</div><div>Why Defend Smokers?</div><div>Everywhere you look, anti-smoking groups are campaigning against smokers.</div><div>They claim smoking kills one third or even half of all smokers; that secondhand</div><div>smoke is a major public health problem; that smokers impose enormous costs on</div><div>the rest of society; and that for all these reasons, taxes on cigarettes should be</div><div>raised.</div><div>There are many reasons to be skeptical about what professional anti-smoking</div><div>advocates say. They personally profit by exaggerating the health threats of</div><div>smoking and winning passage of higher taxes and bans on smoking in public</div><div>places. The anti-smoking movement is hardly a grassroots phenomenon: It</div><div>is largely funded by taxpayers and a few major foundations with left-liberal</div><div>agendas.</div><div>
</div><div>250 Ironically, from Philip Morris, not RJ Reynolds. RJR did “donate” also.</div><div>251 heartland.org/policy-documents/welcome-heartlands-smokers-lounge 2007</div><div>A growing number of independent policy experts from a wide range of</div><div>professions and differing political views are speaking out against the antismoking</div><div>campaign. They defend smokers for several reasons:</div><div>? Smokers already pay taxes that are too high to be fair, and far above any</div><div>cost they impose on the rest of society.</div><div>? The public health community's campaign to demonize smokers and all</div><div>forms of tobacco is based on junk science.</div><div>? Litigation against the tobacco industry is an example of lawsuit</div><div>abuse, and has “loaded the gun” for lawsuits against other industries.</div><div>? Smoking bans hurt small businesses and violate private property rights.</div><div>? The harm caused by smoking can be reduced by educating smokers about</div><div>their options.</div><div>? Punishing smokers “for their own good” is repulsive to the basic</div><div>libertarian principles that ought to limit the use of government force. …</div><div>Junk Science252</div><div>How harmful is smoking to smokers? Public health advocates who claim one</div><div>out of every three, or even one out of every two, smokers will die from a</div><div>smoking-related illness are grossly exaggerating the real threat. …</div><div>Second-hand Smoke</div><div>Is second-hand smoke a rationale for higher taxes on tobacco or smoking bans?</div><div>The research used to justify government regulation of second-hand smoke has</div><div>been powerfully challenged by critics, …</div><div>Underaged Smoking</div><div>Kids shouldn’t smoke cigarettes, but what is the best way to discourage</div><div>underaged smoking? The tobacco industry is working hard to enforce</div><div>minimum age standards by pushing retailers to require proof of age at the time</div><div>of purchase. Despite hysteria from the anti-smoking establishment on this</div><div>matter, cigarette advertising does not target young people.</div><div>Saying we need high taxes on cigarettes to discourage teenagers from smoking is</div><div>dishonest, since most teenage smokers don’t buy their cigarettes, and get them</div><div>instead from parents and adult friends. It is unfair to impose dramatically higher</div><div>taxes on the adults who buy 95 percent or more of all cigarettes sold in order to</div><div>make cigarettes less attractive to the few teenagers who actually pay for their</div><div>cigarettes. …</div><div>
</div><div>252 “Junk science:” PM, TASSC, Steve Milloy, Bonner Cohen, advised by Singer.</div><div>This could have been written by PM or RJR and almost nothing bears scrutiny.</div><div>Read BRA2007 or PRO2012 to return to reality. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>47</div><div>Sample PolicyFAX</div><div>A sample PolicyFax was found in the RJ Reynolds collection.253 Heartland</div><div>touted PolicyFax usage by elected officials, shown earlier, and this</div><div>certainly seems aimed at that audience.</div><div>
</div><div>253 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ecm85a00</div><div>Nonpartisan?</div><div>Really?</div><div>Of legislators,</div><div>Presumably?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/1</div><div>4/12</div><div>48</div><div>G.</div><div>2 Heartland and</div><div>some donors 1999</div><div>- 2003</div><div>Most funds are spent year</div><div>-by</div><div>-year. Heartland</div><div>’s funding has been murkier</div><div>than most</div><div>,</div><div>254 but has gotten clearer. Heartland used to list its donors, as in</div><div>the following from 1999255 or 2000</div><div>-2002.256</div><div>Tobacco companies are arrowed yellow at left.</div><div>Petroleum companies (or their foundations) are red,</div><div>including those who were involved in petroleum at that time, if not now.</div><div>Chemicals/plastics companies have sometimes acted in similar ways.</div><div>Family foundations listed in [MAS2010, p.93] are orange.257</div><div>D&D is now Searle Freedom Trust,</div><div>258 gave $100K in 2009 for conference.</div><div>Some other foundations get donations, then pass money along, purple.</div><div>One might think some of these companies and foundation would hesitate to</div><div>support tobacco advocates. For example, one might not normally group</div><div>Proctor& Gamble or Whole Foods with Philip Morris and RJR.</div><div>Any foundation in 1999/2003 is marked and 1999</div><div>-marked corporations</div><div>are marked at right with green to show 2003, on next pages.</div><div>We have no LTDL</div><div>- equivalent for climate anti</div><div>-science, so only rarely do</div><div>internal memos or emails become public.259</div><div> Other than 990s of</div><div>foundations, later tobacco payments to Heartland do not seem public, but</div><div>seem likely to have continued at least through 2008.</div><div>Starting in 2005, DONORS ramped up major funding,</div><div>§I.</div><div>
</div><div>254 MAS2010 p.68</div><div>-69, 93. Some money comes through trade associations, like</div><div>the API. The usual large conservative family foundations appear often, but have</div><div>donated less to Heartland in recent years, at least directly.</div><div>255</div><div> legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yry82i00/pdf</div><div>www.saschameinrath.com/files/HeartlandInstituteDonors2003.pdf January 2003.</div><div>Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds are still included. 1999 is more complete.</div><div>256wayback.archive.org/web/20000901000000/www.heartland.org/about/donors.</div><div>htm Does include Amoco, Charles Koch, Claude Lambe, J.M. Olin, G.D. Searle,</div><div>Exxon, etc.</div><div>257 MAS2010 p.93 was naturally incomplete. The following shows more money</div><div>from L&H Bradley and R.M. Scaife’s foundations, the two largest contributors to</div><div>GMI over many years, followed by ExxonMobil.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute</div><div>258 Profile akin to other family foundations, but actually lists Purposes. www.eri</div><div>-</div><div>nonprofit</div><div>-salaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=367244615</div><div>259 www.euronet.nl/users/e_wesker/ew@shell/API</div><div>-prop.html GCSCT rare case.</div><div>?</div><div>$200K or more</div><div>$220K to $440K</div><div>$150K to $300K</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>49</div><div>2003:APCO Worldwide - familiar agency, tobacco, climate, etc</div><div>2003: +ExxonMobil Foundation (distinct from ExxonMobil) 2003: Greening Earth Society: familiar front group</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>50</div><div>G.3 Climate outreach, elected officials</div><div>In last few years, Heartland has moved more strongly into climate antiscience.</div><div>Heartland’s current donation page includes:260</div><div> IRS-0E, IRS-5L</div><div>“Communicates frequently with every state and national elected official,</div><div>sending them a publication about every five days and fulfilling thousands of</div><div>information requests.</div><div>Heartland has recently run (relatively lavish) climate anti-science</div><div>conferences, called International Conferences on Climate Change.</div><div>261 They</div><div>are shown chronologically with the various legislative bills262and a few</div><div>related Heartland publications.</div><div>10/18/07 Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act S.2191 introduced</div><div>12/05/07 Lieberman-Warner passed in Senate EPW committee</div><div>03/02/08 Heart#1 –ICCC-1 - New York, -03/04/08</div><div>06/06/08 Republicans filibuster Lieberman-Warner</div><div>03/08/09 Heart#2 –ICCC-2 -New York, -03/10/09 [6 Barton staffers]</div><div>05/15/09 Waxman-Markey introduced, 05/15/09</div><div>06/02/09 Heart#3 –ICCC-3 -Washington, DC</div><div>06/26/09 Waxman-Markey H.R. 2454263 passed in House, sent to Senate</div><div>07/23/09 Legislator’s Guide to Global Warming Experts (G.4)</div><div>08/xx/09 Environment and Climate News, Waxman-Markey front page</div><div>Z.2009.08-1. Page 2 exhorted E&CN readers to act.</div><div>09/30/09 Kerry-Boxer S.1733 introduced264 in Senate</div><div>05/12/10 Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act introduced in Senate</div><div>05/16/10 Heart#4 –ICCC-4 - Chicago, IL -05/18/10 [4 staffers]</div><div>10/01/10 Heart#5 - ICCC-5 - Sydney, Australia</div><div>06/30/11 Heart#6 - ICCC-6 - Washington, DC -07/01/11</div><div>No climate bills were passed, but the history gives context for Heartland’s</div><div>big boost in climate PR activities targeted to legislators.</div><div>
</div><div>260 heartland.org/donate</div><div>261 www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Clean_Energy_and_Security_Act</div><div>262 www.govtrackinsider.com/articles/2010-04-27/climate-change has chronology.</div><div>263 MAS2010 p.85 lists Heart#1 – Heart#4. Heartland’s nomenclature changed.</div><div>climateconference.heartland.org</div><div>264 www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-1733</div><div>Heartland pays travel/lodging for government officials to attend ICCCs.</div><div>265</div><div>
</div><div>Joe Barton (R-TX) staffers accounted for $13,312 and 10 trips in 2009-</div><div>2010, below. Likely, some attended #3 and #6. They claim “educational”</div><div>and “scientific gains made by skeptics.” There is room for doubt.</div><div>Form 990 Part IX Line 18 Payments for Travel by year were:</div><div>2008: $46,655, 2009:$16,851, 2010: $31,373, TOTAL: $94,879, of which</div><div>roughly a seventh went to Barton staffers.</div><div>
</div><div>265 MAS2010 p.156. Peter Spencer (Joe Barton staffer) has gotten 2 free trips:</div><div>www.legistorm.com/trip/list/by/traveler/id/8305/name/Peter_Spencer.html</div><div>www.legistorm.com/trip/list/by/sponsor/id/11321/name/Heartland_Institute.html</div><div>Were their salaries covered by taxpayers? Perhaps they should be asked what they</div><div>learned, to assess the quality of “education”?</div><div>Educational? IRS-0E</div><div>House staffer thought she was exploring science. IRS-5L</div><div>Nonpartisan?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>51</div><div>G.4 Legislator’s Guide to G. W. Experts</div><div>This was generated 07/23/09 266 and a few pages are shown here. IRS-0E</div><div>
</div><div>266web.archive.org/web/20110430014607/www.heartland.org/books/PDFs/Legisla</div><div>torsGuideGW.pdf is an archived copy. MAS2010 p.85 calls this HeartExp#1.</div><div>To calibrate Bast’s credibility, the reader may recall that Bast is a nonscientist</div><div>and staunch defender of Joe Camel, one of the clearest attempts to</div><div>addict children to tobacco. See also Nature.</div><div>267</div><div> or §N.</div><div>Anyone can comment on anything, but what does “study” mean?</div><div>How many climate research papers has Heartland gotten published in</div><div>Science or Nature lately? Their own E&CN does not count.</div><div>“Not on the fringe of the scientific community.” This is correct, most of</div><div>them are not even near the fringe of the relevant community, climate</div><div>science, but far outside, often with totally-irrelevant backgrounds.</div><div>268</div><div>Solomon has often misconstrued people’s views, causing them to</div><div>complain. 269 Solomon labeled the Wegman Report as credible.</div><div>A few do this, but many write for the public, not for science. They often</div><div>cherry-pick data and graphs to confuse people. Very few of these have</div><div>even the slightest credible publication record in climate science. Many</div><div>have worked for tobacco-funded think tanks, with same tactics.</div><div>“This booklet identifies about 150 experts on climate change whose research</div><div>suggests global warming is moderate, mostly natural, and unlikely to be harmful</div><div>to plants, wildlife, or human civilization. I hope you will consider contacting</div><div>some of them in the future when you address this important issue.”</div><div>Many of these have done little or no credible scientific research on climate</div><div>change. Some are climate fakexperts of the most extreme sort. Many</div><div>espouse strong political beliefs.270</div><div> The list might seem impressive, unless</div><div>one understands that 20,000 people attend AGU conferences, alone Their</div><div>claims directly contradict the world’s National Academies and almost all</div><div>science societies. Does the reader believe the National Academies, or a</div><div>defender of Joe Camel?.</div><div>
</div><div>267www.nature.com/nature/journal/v475/n7357/full/475423b.html?WT.ec_id=NAT</div><div>URE-20110728 Nature editorial</div><div>268 If an economist or lawyer accepts mainstream science and then wants to argue</div><div>about policies, that seems fine. Their opinions on climate science (or smoking</div><div>research) might not be very relevant, especially if they are associated with think</div><div>tanks that have taken tobacco or fossil-interest money, as many of these have.</div><div>Some of these fit the extreme fakexpert label perfectly.</div><div>269 HOG2009 pp.158-162.</div><div>270 MCC2011 discusses Conservative White Males. Few females are found here.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>52</div><div>Many are absurd, but the blurbs for NIPCC may be even sillier, next.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>53</div><div>E. Calvin Beisner is a nontechnical theologian with a PhD in Scottish</div><div>History.</div><div>271 He has testified for James Inhofe on climate.</div><div>Michael Coffman earned a PhD in forestry, worked for Champion</div><div>International (paper). He has taught Biblical prophesy and his 1999 digest</div><div>“predicted what was eventually called 9-11.” 272</div><div> In addition:</div><div>“Sovereignty International helps many different organizations to bring a positive</div><div>message of how national sovereignty, free market enterprise, private property</div><div>rights, and traditional values are superior to the global treaties and agreements</div><div>leading to global governance being proposed by the United Nations in</div><div>September, 2000.”</div><div>William Mellberg got a BS in Business Administration, worked in the</div><div>aerospace industry for a few years, and since 1980 has been a political</div><div>humorist and professional speaker. He has performed for Pres. Reagan.273</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>271 ecalvinbeisner.com/bio.pdf;</div><div>272www.discerningtoday.org/drmichael_coffman.htm; sovereignty.net</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champion_International_Paper</div><div>273 www.aneveningwiththepresidents.com/html/about.php</div><div>Richard Lindzen is probably the top climate scientist left to disagree with</div><div>the mainstream, as he has done for about 30 years, despite increasing data.</div><div>He keeps trying to prove low climate sensitivity, but papers keep getting</div><div>refuted. His views have changed little and seem extreme outliers.</div><div>Freeman Dyson has been a fine theoretical physicist, but his ill-informed</div><div>comments on climate modeling are embarrassing. Heartland claims him</div><div>an a climate expert, while real experts are 2 miles away at GFDL274 and he</div><div>could easily talk to them. I am sad he has become a fakexpert.</div><div>Sallie Baliunas “most renowned and respected?” Perhaps by the</div><div>American Petroleum Institute?275</div><div>
</div><div>274 www.gfdl.noaa.gov</div><div>275 API helped fund an infamous paper. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sallie_Baliunas</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>54</div><div>G.5 Prospectus276</div><div> the audience is legislators</div><div>p.1 ‘Welcome to The Heartland Institute, a national nonprofit research and</div><div>education organization devoted to discovering, developing, and promoting</div><div>free-market solutions to social and economic problems. IRS-0E</div><div>We change public policies at the national, state, and local levels of</div><div>government in the United States by contacting more elected officials, more</div><div>often, than any other think tank. We promote the best work of other freemarket</div><div>think tanks, not only our own publications or scholars. And we produce</div><div>publications that surveys show are read by nearly 80 percent of state elected</div><div>officials and 50 percent of local officials. IRS-5L</div><div>Elected officials have used Heartland’s research to stop wasteful government</div><div>spending, eliminate burdensome regulations, and empower individual consumers</div><div>in the areas of health care and education. We are an “action tank” as well as a</div><div>“think tank,” and we measure our success by the impact we have in the real</div><div>world.</div><div>? Our primary audiences are the nation’s 7,300 state elected officials and</div><div>8,400 county and local officials. We reach more elected officials, more</div><div>often, than any other think tank in the U.S. IRS-5L</div><div>? We promote the best work of other free-market think tanks, not just our own</div><div>publications or scholars. No other organization does more than we do to</div><div>promote the work of free-market think tanks and advocacy groups to</div><div>state and local elected officials. … IRS-5L</div><div>The Heartland Institute plays an essential role in the national (and increasingly in</div><div>the international) movement for limited government and personal liberty. We</div><div>are the pipeline between the freedom movement’s leading writers and</div><div>thinkers and the nation’s 50 state legislatures. The states are key</div><div>battlegrounds for the advance of freedom. IRS-5L</div><div>You may also know us from our work exposing the shoddy science and</div><div>missing economics behind the global warming delusion. Our videos, books,</div><div>studies, and international conferences changed the debate and led to the defeat</div><div>of “cap and trade. IRS-5L</div><div>Heartland also has been a leader in advancing school choice, opposing</div><div>implementation of Obamacare, and defeating efforts to tax and regulate the</div><div>Internet.</div><div>We need your support to continue to be the first place busy state and local</div><div>elected officials turn when they need reliable research and commentary.’</div><div>
</div><div>276 heartland.org/media-library/pdfs/2011Prospectus.pdf</div><div>p.3 ‘47% said a Heartland publication influenced their opinions or led to a</div><div>change in public policy.’ IRS-5L</div><div>p.4 ‘35% of state elected officials consider ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE</div><div>news a useful source of information.’ IRS-5L</div><div>p.5 ‘Busy elected officials need a reliable source of research and commentary on</div><div>the most important public policy issues of the day. They need a resource that is</div><div>independent and nonpartisan, that can respond immediately to requests for</div><div>research and expert opinion, and that can tap the resources of all of the country’s</div><div>leading think tanks and expert sources. The Heartland Institute delivers what</div><div>elected officials need. We contact more elected officials, more often, than any</div><div>other free-market organization. Heartland staff contacted elected officials</div><div>more than one million times in 2010. IRS-5L</div><div>Heartland’s Legislative Forum connects approximately 200 dues-paying</div><div>state legislators and staff members with Heartland’s network of 250 public</div><div>policy experts. Forum members act as Heartland’s “eyes and ears” in state</div><div>capitols, keeping us up-to-date on legislation and acting as our</div><div>spokespersons in their states.’ IRS-5L</div><div>p.11 ‘The objective of the Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The</div><div>Heartland Institute is to conduct research and effective advocacy to help</div><div>restore sound science and common sense to efforts to protect the</div><div>environment. Our work focuses on climate change, energy policy, and the</div><div>health and safety effects of pesticides and other chemicals in the environment.’</div><div>IRS-0E</div><div>Contacts and Experts: James M. Taylor, J.D., Jay Lehr, PhD., Craig Idso, PhD.,</div><div>S. Fred Singer, PhD., Maureen Martin, J.D.</div><div>p.14 gives spending and funding for 2010:</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>55</div><div>H. Heartland Financials</div><div>H.1 Overview 990s took at least 3 forms during this time</div><div>Fig. H.1.1 Financials</div><div>H11.2006 (p.2, Line 44(b)) says $3,921,949, and p.3(f) says it should</div><div>match, but it says $2,771,949, perhaps not counting grant of $1,150K (US)</div><div>and $25K foreign. The grants are listed in detail, Fig. H.3.1- 1.</div><div>2007 p.17 shows $135K to 5 entities, covered in Fig. H.3.1- 2.</div><div>p.26 gives auditors report, listing the $135K under “Public Relations.”</div><div>2008 p.1 Line 13 shows $185,671 of grants, to 6 entities outside US,</div><div>labeled only “Research/Publication” ($12,500, $16,870, $5,190, $120,000),</div><div>“Sponsorship” ($15,012), “Translation/Pub.” ($12,500).</div><div>2009 p.10, 3(B) says $115K in grants. p.23 shows 5 grants (4x$25K,</div><div>$15K) to “Research/Publication -East Asia and the Pacific.” p.25:</div><div>“Part 1, Line 2 – Procedures for monitoring the use of grant funds.</div><div>The organization is “friends of” the grant recipients therefore no major tracking</div><div>is necessary.”277</div><div> IRS-7F, IRS-10F</div><div>
</div><div>277 hot-topic.co.nz/cranking-it-out-nz-papers-conned-by-denier-media-strategy</div><div>2010 p.25 lists 3 grants: Pacific Research Institute ($50K), Council for</div><div>Affordable Health 278($20K), Galen Institute ($43K), the latter two in</div><div>Alexandria, VA. SEPP shows $143K in 2007 for NIPCC and $40K in</div><div>2010. If the funds came from Heartland, how did they get to SEPP? Did</div><div>they pass through some of these others? See §H.3 for more detail.</div><div>H21. 2008-2010 were approaching 33.3%, given big donors. IRS-8P</div><div>“In 2007, 71 percent of Heartland’s total revenues of $5.2 million came from</div><div>foundations, 16 percent came from corporations, and 11 percent came from</div><div>individuals. About 1 percent came from interest and sales.”</div><div>279</div><div>
</div><div>278 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=541618589</div><div>279 heartland.org/policy-documents/heartland-report-donors Form 990 Form #1 (plus audits from Illinois) Form #2</div><div>Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOT '02-'10</div><div>Preparation Date #1 #3 08/12/03 07/13/04 06/27/05 09/20/06 08/07/07 08/27/08 07/28/09 06/11/10 07/07/11</div><div>H1 Direct Public Support 1a III.1 1,254,137 1,546,170 1,768,416 4,242,949 2,491,809 4,967,005 7,613,766 6,499,687 5,973,500 36,357,439</div><div>H2 Indirect public support 1b</div><div>H3 Total Piub. Support 1f 8 1,254,137 1,546,170 1,768,416 4,242,949 2,491,809 4,967,005 7,613,766 6,785,374 6,074,947 36,744,573</div><div>H4 Program Service Rev 2 9 269,939 233,787 211,980 229,650 187,267 189,135 185,761 195,386 122,985 1,825,890</div><div>H5 Interest 4 177 1,700 2,819 1,401 42,973 34,587 22,661 58,969 837 166124</div><div>H6 Div & interest, securities 5 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>H7 Gross sales of assets 8a 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>H8 Less cost 8b 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>H9 Gain/loss OR invest income 8c 10 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>H10 TOTAL REVENUE 12 12 1,552,769 1,800,662 2,016,411 4,520,884 2,747,328 5,216,884 7,782,959 6,785,374 6,074,947 38,498,218</div><div>H11 Expense - Program Services 13 III.4e 1,221,542 1,363,284 1,656,989 2,000,981 3,921,949 5,172,467 6,425,416 5,190,761 5,126,734 32,080,123</div><div>H12 Expense - Mgmt&General 14 173,800 185,699 177,730 172,667 176,064 448,138</div><div>H13 Expense - Fundraising 15 127,588 218,902 199,272 195,147 299,987 244,737 601,942 520,729 483,571</div><div>H14 TOTAL EXPENSES 17 18 1,522,930 1,767,885 2,033,991 2,368,795 4,398,000 5,865,342 7,515,026 6,251,523 6,146,497 37,869,989</div><div>H15 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES 18 19 29,839 32,717 -17,580 2,152,089 -1,650,672 -648,458 267,933 533,851 -71,550 628,169</div><div>H16 Net assets, begin year 19 22 -11,280 18,559 51,276 33,696 2,185,785 535,113 -113,345 154,588 688,439</div><div>H17 Net Assets, end of year 21 22 18,559 51,276 33,696 2,185,785 535,113 -113,345 154,588 688,439 473,724</div><div>H19 Lobbying?Influence public? N N N N N N N N N</div><div>H20 Grants & allocations 22 0 0 0 0 1,175,000 135,000 182,072 115,000 118,000</div><div>H21 Public Support % 66.08% 69.96% 74.15% 83.00% 55.35% 52.30% 36.46% 33.02% 35.59%</div><div>H22 % H1(?) from single donor (from audit reports-next page) x 73%(2) 60% 25% 38% 58% 35%</div><div>H23 From one donor (except 2004) 1,290,944 2,545,769 622,952 1,887,462 4,415,984 2,274,890</div><div>H24 From other donors (H1-H24) 1,254,137 1,546,170 477,472 1,697,180 1,868,857 3,079,543 3,197,782 4,224,797 5,973,500</div><div>NOTES: 2005 big asset jump, but then given away the next year; strange grants 2006- $120K foreign $115K Foreign $5K outside US</div><div>Form #3</div><div> Lines Color Line</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>56</div><div>Fig. H.1.2 Support, expenses</div><div>In Figs A.2.2 and A.2.3, SEPP displayed an unusual pattern in which asset</div><div>trading strongly outweighed other income and expenses. Heartland’s</div><div>pattern seems more typical of many 501(c)(3)s, in which yearly revenue</div><div>and expenses roughly match and exceed asset changes.280</div><div>Still, some oddities appear. IRS-7F In 2005, Heartland:</div><div>? got $2.5M more Public Support than in 2004</div><div>? raised its expenses moderately.</div><div>Then, in 2006, Heartland:</div><div>? almost doubled Program Expenses from $2M to $3.9M.</div><div>? made grants of $1.175M to various entities not mentioned before.</div><div>? spent $1.6M of its assets, and in 2007 assets were negative.</div><div>This seems like strange financial management. During a period of</div><div>financial gyration and attempted growth, why would a nonprofit make an</div><div>unusual series of grants of this sort? Perhaps some of the money was given</div><div>to Heartland to be directed elsewhere. See §H.3 for other grant oddities.</div><div>
</div><div>280 Of course, some 501(c)(3) entities, such as museums, often build assets for</div><div>projects or endowments, but donors might look askance at others accumulating</div><div>large assets, especially if the donors are expecting specific services.</div><div>Fig. H.1.3 Assets and trading</div><div>Illinois provides auditor reports for 2003-2009,</div><div>281:</div><div>2004 “Approximately 73% of outstanding accounts receivable at</div><div>December 31, 2004 were from two donors.” –p.27</div><div>2005 “Approximately 74% of outstanding accounts receivable at</div><div>December 31, 2005 were from one donor.</div><div>During 2005, the Organization received 38% of its contribution</div><div>revenue from a single donor.” –p.32</div><div>2006 “During 2006, the Organization received 25% of its contribution</div><div>revenue from a single donor.” –p.33</div><div>2007 “During 2007, the Organization received 38% of its contribution</div><div>revenue from a single donor.” –p.32</div><div>2008 58% from one donor, but 2009 made a stronger statement:</div><div>2009 “Approximately 35% and 58% of The Heartland Institute's total</div><div>support and revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009 and</div><div>2008 respectively, came from contributions from a single</div><div>donor. Any substantial loss of donations from this particular donor</div><div>could significantly affect the Organization's range of services</div><div>provided.” – p.46. IRS-8P The big donor was finally located.</div><div>
</div><div>281 www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/charities/search/index.jsp</div><div>search for Heartland, select Financial Documents. Some files download slowly.</div><div>-2,000,000</div><div>0</div><div>2,000,000</div><div>4,000,000</div><div>6,000,000</div><div>8,000,000</div><div>10,000,000</div><div>12,000,000</div><div>2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>H3 Public Support Total H4 Program Service Revenue H10 TOTAL REVENUE</div><div>H14 TOTAL EXPENSES H15 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES</div><div>YE2005: $1,050,147 cash</div><div>$980,390 - investments -securities</div><div>Donations doubled from $2M to $4M.</div><div>YE2006: $1,175K grants.</div><div>Some seem strange, almost like pass-throughs of some of that</div><div>extra money from 2005 to various other nonprofits.</div><div>2008:</div><div>ICCC-1 NYC</div><div>NIPCC2008</div><div>2009:</div><div>ICCC-2 NYC</div><div>ICCC-3 Washington</div><div>2010:</div><div>ICCC-4 Chicago</div><div>ICCC-5 Sydney</div><div>-2,000,000</div><div>0</div><div>2,000,000</div><div>4,000,000</div><div>6,000,000</div><div>8,000,000</div><div>10,000,000</div><div>12,000,000</div><div>2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>H7 Gross sales of assets H9 Gain/loss OR invest income H17 Net assets, end of year</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>57</div><div>Fig. H.1.4 DONORS, the big donor</div><div>§I describes DONORS CAPITAL FUND / DONORS TRUST, entwined</div><div>with the family foundations and think tanks seen in climate anti-science.</div><div>282</div><div>
</div><div>Foundations normally must name recipients. DONORS hides the sources.</div><div>? (Anonymous) funders put money in accounts with DONORS.</div><div>? Funders generally retain control of grants and recipients, but grants are</div><div>made under DONORS (CAPITAL or TRUST or both).</div><div>? DONORS makes grants without naming funders.283</div><div>? This not only retains anonymity, but can split money. IRS-8P</div><div>Any Heartland funder 1996-2008 did so side-by-side with tobacco.</div><div>By 2007, Heartland funding was strongly dependent on DONORS, which</div><div>accounted for 53% of the total 2007-2009. A few other major or recent</div><div>funders are listed as well, with yet more listed in detail in Fig. H.1.5.</div><div>Private foundations might stop donating visibly to a charity because:</div><div>? It has spent its assets and is winding down.</div><div>? It no longer chooses to give to that charity.</div><div>? It (or its funder(s) directly) gives through DONORS.</div><div>
</div><div>282 And most have taken tobacco money.</div><div>283 This is a financial equivalent of an Internet “anonymizer.”</div><div>DONORS might obtain new money to manage:</div><div>? from funders not previously involved with Heartland or</div><div>? from previously-involved families/foundations who like its anonymity</div><div>and possible help for splitting money among donors.</div><div>In H75-H76, existing foundations moved money to DONORS.</div><div>DONORS CAPITAL sometimes transferred money to DONORS TRUST,</div><div>H77, for reasons unclear, possibly IRS-8P. Of course, money might be</div><div>placed with DONORS some year, but not flow onward then.</div><div>H71.2005 implies that some other, yet-to-be discovered source gave 38%.</div><div>DONORS CAPITAL 2006 990 claimed that a grantee schedule for $19M</div><div>was attached, but none was (grey), likewise for 2007 Searle. Given 2005,</div><div>2007-2009 DONORS numbers, it is likely that H71.2006 was about</div><div>$600K, 25% of the total public support. H71.2007 is puzzling, as 60%</div><div>from DONORS exceeds the 38% by auditors. Year 2010 data is mostly</div><div>unavailable, so was omitted from the % analyses.</div><div>More foundation funding may yet to be found. Direct corporate funding is</div><div>of course invisible However, such do not matter much:</div><div>DONORS has been the key Heartland funder from 2007 onward,</div><div>coincident with the big expansion. Further details are shown next.</div><div>990 Form #1 Form #2</div><div>Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOT '07-'09</div><div>H1 Direct Public Support 1a III.1 1,254,137 1,546,170 1,768,416 4,242,949 2,491,809 4,967,005 7,613,766 6,499,687 5,973,500 19,080,458</div><div>H3 Total Piub. Support 1f 8 1,254,137 1,546,170 1,768,416 4,242,949 2,491,809 4,967,005 7,613,766 6,785,374 6,074,947 19,366,145</div><div>H10 TOTAL REVENUE 12 12 1,552,769 1,800,662 2,016,411 4,520,884 2,747,328 5,216,884 7,782,959 6,785,374 6,074,947 19,785,217</div><div>Tobacco funding, Figure F.4, §G.1</div><div>VA DONORS CAPITAL 0 0 0 550,427 2,955,437 4,610,000 2,171,530 N/A 9,736,967</div><div>VA DONORS TRUST 0 0 0 0 0 11,750 516,500 N/A 528,250</div><div>WI L&H Bradley 95,000 105,000 125,000 105,000 100,000 75,000 25,000 125,000 25,000 225,000</div><div>DC Searle Freedom Trust (D&D) 150,000 N/A 150,000</div><div>H71 % from 1 donor (audit,previous page) 38% 25% 38% 59% 35%</div><div>H72 % from DONORS CAPITAL+TRUST 0% 0% 0% 13% 60% 61% 40% 53%</div><div>H73 Totals of above 95,000 105,000 125,000 655,427 100,000 3,030,437 4,646,750 2,963,030 10,640,217</div><div>H74 Totals as % of public support 8% 7% 7% 15% 4% 61% 61% 44% 55%</div><div>H75 Searle Freedom Trust (D&D)=>DONORS 163,800 60,000 50,000 100,000 692,000 370,000 50,000</div><div>H76 L&H Bradley => DONORS 5,000 5,000 65,000 525,000</div><div>H77 DONORS CAPITAL => DONORS TRUST 25,000 25,000 25,000 697,500 1,527,500 1,800,000</div><div>Form #3</div><div>1993-2001, 2003 known likely, Roy Marden (PM) on Board ~1996-2008</div><div> Lines</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>58</div><div>Fig. H.1.5 DONORS and others itemized</div><div>Black: unclassifiable, blue: not climate, purple: general funding, so part climate; red: climate, or E&CN Total by</div><div>2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 (Sub)Totals donor</div><div>Corporate foundations</div><div>ExxonMobil Foundation General operating supt 85,000 75,000 29,000 189,000</div><div>For climate change efforts 15,000 15,000</div><div>EIN: 136082357 For general operating support - Climate Change 90,000 90,000 294,000</div><div>American Petroleum Inst Energy education 25,000 25,000</div><div>EIN: 130433430 25,000</div><div>General Motors Foundation Continuing/General support 40,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 15,000 205,000</div><div>EIN: 382132136 205,000</div><div>Chrysler Foundation Research & educn on environ. public policies 40,000 40,000</div><div>EIN: 386087371 Pub .of Environment and Climate News 40,000 25,000 65,000 105,000</div><div>Family foundations, followed by DONORS</div><div>L&H Bradley School Reform News 20,000 30,000 50,000 30,000 25,000 155,000</div><div>EIN: 396037928 General operations 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 525,000</div><div>Note: $25K in 2001 for SRN To support the International Conference on Climate Change, 03/10/09 100,000 100,000</div><div>For distribution of climate-change research in India 50,000 50,000 830,000</div><div>Barbara and Barre Seid F (No purpose ) 150,000 154,689 176,788 43,000 524,477</div><div>EIN: 363342443 524,477</div><div>Searle Freedom Trust Marketing for climate change conference marketing for climate change conference 100,000 100,000</div><div>EIN: 367244615 Marketing for climate change conference marketing for climate change conference 50,000 50,000 150,000</div><div>Chase Foundation of VA (No purpose specified, so assumed general) 30,500 25,000 25,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 125,500</div><div>EIN: 367244615 125,500</div><div>John Willilam Pope F General/unrestricted support 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 100,000</div><div>EIN: 581691765 100,000</div><div>Jaquelin Hume Foundation Unrestricted support 25,000 25,000 10,000 25,000 85,000</div><div>EIN: 946080099 85,000</div><div>Triad Foundation, Inc. For Heartland's Center on Climate and Environmental Policy 50,000 50,000</div><div>EIN: 300108102 For the Fourth International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago 25,000 25,000 75,000</div><div>DONORS CAPITAL for the Ranthum, Australia and Old projects (unknown: Australia might be Jo Nova or ICCC-6) 300,000 300,000</div><div>EIN: 541934032 For "CORE" 10,590 10,590</div><div>for health care project 190,000 190,000</div><div>(No purpose specified, so assumed general) 550,427 2,955,437 3,505,864</div><div>For general operations 2,000,000 400,000 2,400,000</div><div>For annual support 500,000 500,000</div><div>Final installment of three-year general ops support 1,300,000 1,300,000</div><div>For staff directed research 126,000 126,000</div><div>For the global warming research project 900,000 900,000</div><div>For global warming research projects 184,000 184,000</div><div>$620,940 for GW-end and $500,000 for annual support 620,940 620,940</div><div>For G.W. reporting for one year 150,000 150,000 10,187,394</div><div>DONORS TRUST For general operations 11,750 500,000 511,750</div><div>EIN: 522166327 for general operations 5,000 5,000</div><div>for general operations 3,000 3,000</div><div>for general operations 1,000 1,000</div><div>for advertising 6,500 6,500</div><div>emphasis on marketing of research 1,000 1,000 528,250</div><div>Totals of the larger donors 245,000 409,689 512,288 774,427 290,000 3,138,437 4,686,750 3,013,030 165,000 13,234,621 13,234,621</div><div>% of total public support (Figure H.1.4, line H3) 20% 26% 29% 18% 12% 63% 62% 44% too many missing numbers</div><div>Singer claimed $143K(2007)</div><div>and $40K (2010), close</div><div>but years are wrong, but</div><div>maybe Heartland paid then</div><div>and got money lin 2008?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>59</div><div>Given multiple gifts with similar names in same year, it seems likely that</div><div>several separate funders have given to Heartland. Funders can donate for</div><div>general support, of which some fraction would be used for climate efforts,</div><div>such as E&CN. Some itemizations show explicit support for climate</div><div>disinformation and its marketing, i.e., E&CN, NIPCC, ICCC conferences.</div><div>Of course, donors might specify school reform or other purposes.</div><div>I allege that none of this is science or education, but advocacy of</div><div>disinformation, so that DONORS has seriously violated public charity</div><div>rules, IRS-0E, IRS-5L, IRS-7F</div><div>DONORS’ Whitney Ball signed the 990s, so she is certainly responsible,</div><div>although the actual funder(s) are not publicly known, §I.</div><div>If these various climate activities are ruled invalid for 501(c)3, then the</div><div>other large donors in Fig. H.1.5 certainly face the same issue:</div><div>Money is fungible and some of it has been used for E&CN and other</div><div>related activities for years, not just for these specific projects. About 40</div><div>more donors are involved, but most of the larger ones are shown. Still,</div><div>this problem may apply to every donor who gave unrestricted money.</div><div>Some readers may be surprised to see no Scaife or Koch foundations</div><div>involved, at least directly. Elsewhere, there have been hints that they often</div><div>give seed funding and continuing support for a while, gather support from</div><div>others, and then in some cases, reduce their own funding.</div><div>In this case:</div><div>? Media Matters Action Network lists donations from earlier years:284</div><div>Scaife (SSF) donated $325K 1991-1998 and Carthage $10K in 1996.</div><div>Charles Koch Foundation donated $38K 1986 1989, 1995-1996.</div><div>Claude Lambe Foundation gave $40K 1992-1999.</div><div>See MMAN for details of other funders.</div><div>? The Kochs (via Charles Koch and sometimes Claude Lambe) were</div><div>donors 1999 through 2002, as per §G.2. The 1999 Heartland Sponsors</div><div>page put both in the $10K-$20K Silver Sponsor category. That seems</div><div>to imply $20K-$40K for 1999 and additional funding through 2002.</div><div>
</div><div>284mediamattersaction.org/transparency/organization/Heartland_Institute/funders</div><div>In 2010, L&H Bradley gave $50K for “distribution of climate-change</div><div>research in India.” Since Heartland has yet to produce any credible climate</div><div>research, this is curious. Of course, this vague purpose does not explain</div><div>where the money eventually landed, possibly in 2011. IRS-7F</div><div>One possibility is Liberty Institute, 285 a free-market think tank whose</div><div>Managing Trustee is Barun S. Mitra, listed as a Global Warming Expert by</div><div>Heartland in their Legislator’s Guide, §G.4:286</div><div>“Barun S. Mitra is founder and director of the Liberty Institute in New Delhi,</div><div>India, a nonprofit, independent public policy research and educational</div><div>organization, dedicated to providing market-based responses to contemporary</div><div>public policy issues that enhance freedom of choice for all.”</div><div>Since South Asia includes India, perhaps some of the 2008-2009 funds</div><div>went there, also, Fig. H.3.1-2.</div><div>Tibor R. Machan has been an advisor for the Liberty Institute from 2001.287</div><div>His book was reviewed in E&CN, Z.2004.09-19, and he later wrote</div><div>Z.2007.11.-13:</div><div>“Global Warming Ad Hominem Attacks Show Alarmist Believers’</div><div>Desperation.”</div><div>
</div><div>285 www.libertyindia.org/about.htm</div><div>286web.archive.org/web/20110430014607/www.heartland.org/books/PDFs/Legisla</div><div>torsGuideGW.pdf p.22</div><div>287 web.archive.org/web/20010614140702/www.libertyindia.org/about.htm</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>60</div><div>H.2 Program service expenses</div><div>H33, H37, H41, H45: it is slightly odd that all had exactly 32 speaking</div><div>engagements, but this seems merely inattention.</div><div>H50, H55, H57, H60, H63: grants are detailed later, §H.3. IRS-7F</div><div>H58, H61, H64 mention presentations for ALEC, a conservative political</div><div>group organized to write legislation around the USA.</div><div>H53, H58, H61, H64 specifically discuss efforts with government,</div><div>including tobacco 3 times, as late as 2010.</div><div>Many lines mention “educating.” Is that education in support of smoking</div><div>or promotion of incorrect, long-debunked claims on climate? IRS-0E</div><div>If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it</div><div>probably is a duck. Read these 2 pages carefully.</div><div>This looks like a politically-oriented PR + lobbying agency that promotes</div><div>demonstrable untruths about climate science, tax-free.</div><div>What public interest is served by a Joe Camel defender talking to</div><div>government about tobacco?</div><div>Fig. H.2.1-1 Program service expenses</div><div>Form 990 activities a/b/c/d Total</div><div>H30 2002 a.Publications - research & writing on public policy issues. Heartland produced a bimonthly magazine, three monthly newspapers and four policy reports in 2002. 838,943</div><div>H31 b.Internet projects - Heartland operated a free web-based research service in 2002 and had an extensive Internet presence. 206,640</div><div>H32 c.Member services - seminars and events for Heartland members and the public, a monthly membership newsletter and similar activities. 137,316</div><div>H33 d.Speakers bureau - Heartland offers its senior fellows and staff members as speakers for events hosted by other organizations. the speakers bureau produced 32 speaking engagements in 2002. 38,643 1,221,542</div><div>H34 2003 a.Publications - research & writing on Public policy issues. Heartland produced four newsletters, four monthly newspapers and four policy reports in 2003. 961,357</div><div>H35 b.Internet projects - Heartland operated a free web-based research service in 2003 and had an extensive Internet presence. 187,350</div><div>H36 c.Member services - seminars and events for Heartland members and the public, a monthly membership newsletter and similar activities. 172,544</div><div>H37 d.Speakers bureau - Heartland offers its senior fellows and staff members as speakers for events hosted by other organizations. the speakers bureau produced 32 speaking engagements in 2003. 42,033 1,363,284</div><div>H38 2004 a.Publications - research & writing on Public policy issues. Heartland produced four newsletters, four monthly newspapers and four policy reports in 2004. 1,150,990</div><div>H39 b.Internet projects - Heartland operated a free web-based research service in 2004 and had an extensive Internet presence. 200,747</div><div>H40 c.Member services - seminars and events for Heartland members and the public, a monthly membership newsletter and similar activities. 252,701</div><div>H41 d.Speakers bureau - Heartland offers its senior fellows and staff members as speakers for events hosted by other organizations. the speakers bureau produced 32 speaking engagements in 2004. 52,551 1,656,989</div><div>H42 2005 a.Publications - research & writing on Public policy issues. Heartland produced four newsletters, four monthly newspapers and four policy reports in 2005. 1,460,636</div><div>H43 b.Internet projects - Heartland operated a free web-based research service in 2005 and had an extensive Internet presence. 235,343</div><div>H44 c.Member services - seminars and events for Heartland members and the public, a monthly membership newsletter and similar activities. 211,758</div><div>H45 d.Speakers bureau - Heartland offers its senior fellows and staff members as speakers for events hosted by other organizations. the speakers bureau produced 32 speaking engagements in 2005. 93,244 2,000,981</div><div>H46 2006 a.Publications - research & writing on Public policy issues. Heartland produced four newsletters, four monthly newspapers, two books and one booklet in 2006. 2,070,797</div><div>H47 b.Internet projects - Heartland operated a free web-based research service in 2005 and had an extensive Internet presence. 284,288</div><div>H48 c.Member services - seminars and events for Heartland members and the public, a monthly membership newsletter and similar activities. 295,872</div><div>H49 d.Speakers bureau - Heartland offers its senior fellows and staff members as speakers for events hosted by other organizations. the speakers bureau produced 80 speaking engagements in 2006. 95,992 2,746,949</div><div>H50 e.Other (grants and allocations: $1,150,000) 25,000</div><div>H51 2007 a.Publications - research & writing on Public policy issues. Heartland produced two newsletters, five monthly newspapers, three books and one booklet in 2007. 2,389,180</div><div>H52 b.Public relations - seminars, events, a web site, speakers bureau and other activities aimed at educating Heartland members and the general Public policy issues. 1,791,365</div><div>H53 c. Government relations - publications and events geared toward educating and informing local, state and national elected officials about public policy issues. 904,293</div><div>H54 d. New coalition - publications and events geared toward educating and informing leaders of african-american, hispanic and other minority groups. 87,629 5,172,467</div><div>H55 e.other (grants and allocations: $135,000)</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>61</div><div>Fig. H.2.1-2 Program Service Expenses</div><div>Form 990 activities a/b/c/d Total</div><div>H56 2008</div><div>a.Publications - research, writing, and distribution of Publications on Public policy issues, in print as well as online. Heartland produced five monthly newspapers (budget & tax news, environment &</div><div>climate news, health care news, infotech & telecom news, and school reform news); two newsletters (the Heartlander and lawsuit abuse fortnightly); three "report cards" (addressing welfare</div><div>fortnightly); three "report cards" (addressing welfare reform, school choice, and property & casualty insurance); two books (booker t. washington: a re-examination and energy keepers energy</div><div>killers); and two booklets ...</div><div>3,031,500</div><div>H57</div><div>b. Public relations - seminars, events, speakers bureau, and other activities aimed at educating Heartland members and other activities aimed at educating Heartland members and the general Public</div><div>concerning Public policy issues. Heartland staff exhibited at more than a dozen industry trade shows and events for members of the general Public, and its senior fellows delivered more than 100</div><div>speeches or talk radio show appearances. Heartland's Public relations department hosted a three-day conference in new york addressing the topic of global warming. ( including grants of $182,072.)</div><div>2,765,596</div><div>H58</div><div>c.Government relations - publications and events geared toward educating and informing local, state, and national elected officials about public policy issues. Heartland exhibited at conferences</div><div>sponsored by the american legislative exchange council, national conference of state legislatures, national association of counties, u.s. conference of mayors, and others. in addition, 49 research &</div><div>commentary collections of background readings on education, environment, health care, insurance, tobacco, and welfare</div><div>628,320 6,425,416</div><div>H59 2009</div><div>a. Publications - research, writing, and distribution of Publications on Public policy issues, in print as well as online. Heartland produced five monthly newspapers (budget & tax news, environment &</div><div>climate news, health care news, infotech & telecom news, and school reform news); one print newsletter (the Heartlander), two email newsletters (lawsuit abuse fortnightly and consumer power</div><div>report); one "report card" (addressing property & casualty insurance); and one book (climate change reconsidered) .</div><div>2,078,375</div><div>H60</div><div>b. Public relations - seminars, events, speakers bureau, and other activities aimed at educating Heartland members and the general Public concerning Public policy issues. Heartland staff exhibited at</div><div>nearly two dozen industry trade shows and events for members of the general Public, and its senior fellows delivered more than 100 speeches or talk radio show including grants of $115,000.</div><div>appearances. Heartland's Public relations department hosted a three-day conference in new york and a two-day conference in washinton, dc addressing the topic of global warming.</div><div>2,518,769</div><div>H61</div><div>c. Government relations - publications and events geared toward educating and informing local, state, and national elected officials about public policy issues. Heartland exhibited at conferences</div><div>sponsored by the AmericanLegislative Exchange Council, national conference of state legislatures, national association of counties, u.s. conference of mayors, and others. in addition, 44 research &</div><div>commentary collections of background readings on education, environment, health care, insurance ,tobacco, and welfare issues were distributed by email and posted on Heartland's web site.</div><div>Heartland's Government relations department hosted several half-day events across the country addressing health care reform.</div><div>593,617 5,190,761</div><div>H62 2010</div><div>a. Publications - research, writing, and distribution of Publications on Public policy issues, in print as well as online. Heartland produced six monthly newspapers (two of them digital-only) (budget &</div><div>tax news, environment & climate news, fire policy news, health care news, infotech & telecom news, and school reform news); one print newsletter (the Heartlander), two email newsletters</div><div>(lawsuit abuse fortnightly and consumer power report); two legislative principles booklets (addressing business climate and federal tax policy); five policy studies and policy briefs; and two books</div><div>(both addressing health care policy) .</div><div>2,372,624</div><div>H63</div><div>b.public relations - seminars, events, speakers bureau, and other activities aimed at educating Heartland members and the general public concerning public policy issues. Heartland staff exhibited at</div><div>nearly two dozen industry trade shows and events for members of the general public, and its senior fellows delivered more than 100 speeches to audiences totaling 18,800 people. Heartland's public</div><div>relations department hosted a three day conference in chicago and a one-day conference in sydney, australia addressing the topic of global warming. (including grants of $118,000.) 2,030,772</div><div>H64</div><div>c.Government relations - publications and events geared toward educating and informing local, state, and national elected officials about public policy issues. Heartland exhibited at conferences</div><div>sponsored by the american legislative exchange council, national conference of state legislatures, national association of counties, and others. in addition, 46 research & commentary collections of</div><div>background readings on education, environment, health care, insurance, tobacco, and welfare issues were distributed by email and posted on Heartland's web site. Heartland's government relations</div><div>department hosted a day-long conference in chicago, the emerging issues forum, addressing public policy issues.</div><div>723,338 5,126,734</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>62</div><div>H.3 Grants and allocations</div><div>Fig. H.3.1-1 Grants and allocations</div><div>H50a FEEI was/is run by Steve Milloy (TASSC)288</div><div>H50b MPI's films.</div><div>289</div><div> Phelem McAleer is a Fellow.290</div><div>H50c AFM promotes DDT.291</div><div>H50d Shimer College is a small (₁₀₀ students) college in Chicago.292</div><div>H50e TPPF is a think tank, with funding from the Kochs and other</div><div>foundations, and ties to GMU and its Mercatus Center, among others.293</div><div>H50f EFF is a libertarian think tank with strong ties to ALEC.294</div><div>H50g AFP295 is the key Koch-funded Tea Party organizer.</div><div>H50h JMI is think tank, with some funding from CATO.296</div><div>H50i MHPC is think tank, with some CATO funding.297</div><div>H50j API2 is another think tank.</div><div>298</div><div>
</div><div>288www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Free_Enterprise_Education_Institute</div><div>www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=128</div><div>289 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Picture_Institute</div><div>290 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Phelim_McAleer</div><div>291 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Africa_Fighting_Malaria</div><div>292 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimer_College</div><div>293 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Texas_Public_Policy_Foundation</div><div>294 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Evergreen_Freedom_Foundation</div><div>295 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_For_Prosperity_Foundation</div><div>296 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_Madison_Institute</div><div>297 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Maine_Heritage_Policy_Center</div><div>H50k SCPC is a policy research entity, with some CATO funding.299</div><div>H50l KTN seems to have merged with AFP.</div><div>300</div><div>It is not easy to explain why Heartland gave one-time gifts, so maybe:</div><div>? Heartland came into unexpected money and kindly gave it away to this</div><div>variety of organizations, not funded otherwise during 2002-2010.</div><div>? Heartland got money with instructions to give some away as desired.</div><div>? Heartland got money with explicit instructions to pass it along. All of</div><div>the charities above also received funds from DONORS (and Bradley,</div><div>Kochs, Scaife, Searle or B&B Seid) during most of 2005-2009. That</div><div>could be coincidence or not.301</div><div>The rules try to assure that charity has some broad public support. If too</div><div>much money comes from a few donors, charity status can be lost. This</div><div>may explain some puzzling funding patterns. IRS-8P</div><div>
</div><div>298 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_Policy_Institute</div><div>www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=630809568</div><div>299 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=South_Carolina_Policy_Council</div><div>300 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kansas_Taxpayers_Network</div><div>www.afphq.org/122308-kansas-taxpayer-network-merges-afp-kansas</div><div>301 It is unfortunate that DONORS CAPITAL 2006 is missing recipients. Heartland Grants and Allocations (Ch = Charity or not), Part 1 of 2 Abbrev Ch 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>H50 2006 e.Other (grants and allocations: $1,150,000) p.18-19</div><div>H50a SCHOOL REFORM: FREE ENTERPRISE EDUCATION INSTITUTE, 12309 BRIARBUSH LANE, POTOMAC, MD 20854 FEEI Y 25,000</div><div>H50b ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: MOVING PICTURE INSTITUTE, 260 WEST 54TH STREET, #15G, NEW YORK, NY MPI Y 250,000</div><div>H50c HEALTH CARE: AFRICA FIGHTING MALARIA, 2600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW #7A, WASHINGTON D.C. 20037 AFM Y 25,000</div><div>H50d SCHOOL REFORM: SHIMER COLLEGE, 414 NORTH SHERIDAN ROAD, WAUKEGAN, IL 60085 SHIMER Y 500,000</div><div>H50e SCHOOL REFORM: TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION, 900 CONGRESS AVE., SUITE 400, AUSTIN, TX 78701 TPPF Y 100,000</div><div>H50f BUDGET & TAX REFORM: EVERGREEN FREEDOM FOUNDATION, P.O. BOX 552, OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98507 EFF Y 50,000</div><div>H50g BUDGET & TAX REFORM: AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION AFP Y 50,000</div><div>H50h BUDGET & TAX REFORM: JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE, P.O. BOX 13894, TALLAHASSEE, FL 32317 JMI Y 50,000</div><div>H50i BUDGET & TAX REFORM: MAINE HERITAGE POLICY CENTER, P.O. BOX 7829, POTRTLAND, ME 04112 MHPC Y 50,000</div><div>H50j BUDGET & TAX REFORM: ALABAMA POLICY INSTITUTE, 402 OFFICE PARK DRIVE, SUITE 300, BIRMINGHAM, AL API2 Y 40,000</div><div>H50k BUDGET & TAX REFORM: SOUTH CAROLINA POLICY COUNCIL, 1323 PENDLETON STREET, COLUMBIA, SC 29201 SCPC Y 10,000</div><div>H50l BUDGET & TAX REFORM: KANSAS TAXPAYERS NETWORK KTP Y 25,000</div><div>H50m UNRESTRICTED GRANTS TO OTHER 501C(3) WITH MISSIONS IN LINE WITH HEARTLAND INST: $1,150,000</div><div>IRS-7F, IRS-8P?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>63</div><div>Fig. H.3.1-2 Grants and allocations</div><div>H55: The 2007 SEPP shows $143K for NIPCC, so $128K is still</div><div>unknown. Did some flow through Canadian and New Zealand –based</div><div>anti-climate science entities? Or was it or their use, to help ICCCs, NIPCC</div><div>and a trip to IPCC’s Bali meeting seem more “international.” §E, §H.4</div><div>H57: in 2008, $182,027 went to various totally-unspecified locations.</div><div>H60: in 2009, $115,000 went to East Asia/Pacific, which of course</div><div>includes Australia, New Zealand and perhaps India, all of which have</div><div>people who cooperate closely with Heartland, §H.4.</div><div>H63: There is no trace of SEPP’s 2010 $40K for NIPCC. Perhaps that</div><div>money came from someone else or was partially routed through the</div><div>following. CfAH and Galen are located about 4 miles from SEPP, but</div><div>given the number of think tanks nearby, that may be coincidence.</div><div>Alternatively, Heartland pay have paid SEPP through the large PR budget</div><div>H63a: PRI,</div><div>302</div><div> Pacific Research Institute</div><div>H63b: CfAHI,</div><div>303 Council for Affordable Health (Insurance)</div><div>H63c: Galen Institute304</div><div>
</div><div>302 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pacific_Research_Institute odd</div><div>303 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=541618589</div><div>304 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Galen_Institute</div><div>L&H Bradley, Scaife, Searle and DONORS have made major gifts over last few</div><div>years . IRS-8P?</div><div>Heartland Grants and Allocations (Ch = Charity or not) Part 2 of 2 Abbrev Ch 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>H55 2007 e.Other (grants and allocations: $135,000) p.17</div><div>H55a ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: NATURAL RESOURCES STEWARDSHIP PROJECT, P.O. BOX 23013, OTTAWA, NRSP N 25,000</div><div>H55b ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: FRONTIER CENTRE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, ONE LOMBARD PLACE, SUITE 25 LOMBARD FCPP Y 25,000</div><div>H55c ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: NEW ZEALAND CLIMATE SCIENCE COALITION, 1104 ONERIRI RD, R.D. 2, KAIWAKA, NZCSC N 25,000</div><div>H55d ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT, 1600 SOUTH EADS STREET #712-S, SEPP Y 15,000</div><div>H55e ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE: INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE SCIENCE COALITION, POBOX 304001, HAURAKI, NORTH ICSC N 45,000</div><div>H55f UNRESTRICTED GRANTS TO 501C(3)AND OTHERS WITH MISSIONS IN LINE WITH HEARTLAND INST. (3 of 5 not</div><div>H57 2008 b. PUBLIC RELATIONS … Including grants of $182,072. p.22 2,765,596</div><div>H57a (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 12,500</div><div>H57b (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 16,870</div><div>H57c (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 5,190</div><div>H57d (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 120,000</div><div>H57e (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) SPONSORSHIP 15,012</div><div>H57f (no organization, code, or region, but outside US) TRANSLATION/PUB. 12,500</div><div>H60 2009 b. PUBLIC RELATIONS ... Including grants of $115,000. p.23 2,518,769</div><div>H60a (no organization, code, EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 15,000</div><div>H60b (no organization, code, EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 25,000</div><div>H60c (no organization, code, EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 25,000</div><div>H60d (no organization, code, EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 25,000</div><div>H60e (no organization, code, EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC) RESEARCH/PUBLICATION 25,000</div><div>H63 2010 b.PUBLIC RELATIONS … Including grants of $118,000. p.25 2,030,772</div><div>H63a PACIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE, 1 EMBARCADERO CENTER SUITE 350, SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111 PRI Y 50,000</div><div>H63b COUNCIL FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTH, 127 S. PEYTON ST. #210, ALEXANDRIA VA 22314 CfAH Y 20,000</div><div>H63c GALEN INSTITUTE, 128 S. ROYAL ST. #200, ALEXANDRIA VA 22314 Galen Y 43,000</div><div>H63d p.10 Line 3 Grants outside US 5,000</div><div>H64 Totals (of black) 1,175,000 135,000 182,072 115,000 118,000</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>64</div><div>H.4 Funny foreign grants -NZ, CA, AU, IN?</div><div>On the previous page, H55a-H55e listed 4 foreign 2007 recipients:</div><div>NRSP – National Resources Stewardship Project - $25,000 IRS-10F</div><div>APCO’s PR professional Tom Harris305 was the Executive Director of this</div><div>front group, whose website disappeared by December 2008.306</div><div> He was</div><div>behind the Bali petition, so this money might have helped pay for that.307</div><div>FCPP – Frontier Center for Public Policy308</div><div>- $25,000</div><div>This Manitoba-based think tank included Research Advisors in 2006:309</div><div>Alex Avery Hudson Institute, has written for E&CN, §X.2.</div><div>Tim Ball Chairman of Scientific Advisory Committee for NRSC. 310</div><div>He spoke at ICCC-1, was on Heartland “experts” lists.</div><div>Wendell Cox Wendell Cox Consultancy, has written often for E&CN.</div><div>NZCSC – New Zealand Climate Science Coalition - $25,000 IRS-10F</div><div>Started in 2006,</div><div>311 founders included Vincent Gray, Bob Carter, Warwick</div><div>Hughes, Roger Dewhurst, and Owen McShane (the receiver of money).</div><div>ICSC – International Climate Science Coalition - $40,000 IRS-10F</div><div>Started in 2007, Tom Harris is Executive Director.312 Terry Dunleavy (NZ)</div><div>and Bryan Leyland (NZ) are officers, and Heartland’s Jay Lehr is a</div><div>Director. The address was Terry Dunleavy’s.</div><div>NZCSC, ICSC and the NZ ACT party involved NZ’s Alan Gibbs. 313</div><div>Hot Topic details Heartland funding of NZCSC and ICSC.314 Harris,</div><div>Leyland and Dewhurst commented there, offering credibility calibration.</div><div>
</div><div>305 www.desmogblog.com/tom-harris</div><div>306 wayback.archive.org/web/20080801000000/nrsp.com</div><div>307 LTDLdeepclimate.org/2009/12/10/bali-2007-revisited</div><div>308 www.cra-arc.gc.ca/chrts-gvng/lstngs/menu-eng.html charity</div><div>309 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frontier_Institute_for_Public_Policy</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frontier_Centre_for_Public_Policy</div><div>310 www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball Formal training was geography.</div><div>311www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=New_Zealand_Climate_Science_Coalition</div><div>312www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Climate_Science_Coalition</div><div>313 deepclimate.org/2009/08/01/meet-alan-gibbs-builder-of-amphibious-humveesand-climate-science-coalitions</div><div>Useful background, read comments as well.</div><div>Gray, Leyland and McShane attended the IPCC Bali 2007 meeting, in</div><div>support of CFACT, but paid for at least in part by Heartland.315</div><div>Of these 4 organizations, 3 were not registered as charities in their home</div><div>countries. Some of the money helped send to Bali some people with strong</div><div>opinions, whose climate expertise was doubtful at best. Unless they had</div><div>IRS “determination letters,” Heartland is required to show that they used</div><div>the money to further exempt purposes. IRS-10F</div><div>Of course, NZ might want to inquire of McShane and Dunleavy, and CA of</div><div>Harris as to whether these grants were reported as taxable income.</div><div>As for 2008-2009, I can only guess: IRS-7F, IRS-10F.</div><div>? More money to NZCSC or ICSC?</div><div>? Money to IPA316 to get ready for 2010 ICCC-5 in Sydney?</div><div>317</div><div>? Money to Joanne Nova for Skeptic’s Handbook?318</div><div> It has been</div><div>translated into many languages (H57f?) and sent to 14,000 US school</div><div>board presidents by Heartland., Z.2009.08.11, §N.2.</div><div>? Money to India, possibly Barun M. Mitra, §G.4.? See 2010 Bradley</div><div>grant to India, Fig. H.1.5. Mitra is not a climate researcher,</div><div>319 and</div><div>advisors to his think tank include Tibor Machan, §X.2</div><div>
</div><div>314 hot-topic.co.nz/puppets-on-a-string-us-think-tank-funds-nz-sceptics</div><div>hot-topic.co.nz/niwa-v-cranks-3-the-economics-of-truthiness/</div><div>315 www.listener.co.nz/current-affairs/ecologic/some-like-it-hot-3</div><div>316 www.desmogblog.com/study-tracks-australian-climate-denial-echo-chamberback-think-tank;</div><div>www.climateshifts.org/?p=4643</div><div>www.brisbanetimes.com.au/environment/bid-to-out-the-money-behind-the-voiceagainst-climate-change-20120126-1qjfp.html</div><div>
</div><div>317 scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/03/heartlands_denialist_conferenc.php</div><div>318www.desmogblog.com/joanne-nova-climate-skeptics-handbook</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-handbook-carbon-dioxide-climate-change</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/debunking-joanne-nova-climate-skeptics-handbookglobal-warming-real-and-happening</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/debunking-joanne-nova-climate-skeptics-handbook-part-3-</div><div>climate-models-have-it-right</div><div>scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/skeptics_handbook_not_novel_no.php</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/A-Scientific-Guide-to-the-Skeptics-Handbook.html</div><div>319 www.libertyindia.org/about.htm</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>65</div><div>I. Follow the money to DONORS Trust/Capital</div><div>Heartland’s funding has long been rather opaque.</div><div>? §G.2 accounts for at least $570K in 1999, including corporations that</div><div>would never appear in 990s.</div><div>? L&H Bradley, Scaife and the Kochs provided early funding, but only</div><div>Bradley seemed to continue. ExxonMobil Foundation stopped. 320</div><div>Total known foundation funding accounted for a small fraction.</div><div>? §H.1 shows a large boost in funding ~2007, coincident with increased</div><div>climate anti-science disinformation activities by Heartland, such as</div><div>NIPCC §E, Legislator’s Guide §G,3 and the ICCCs, §G.3.</div><div>Who was funding this? Part of the answer is now clear.</div><div>Philanthropy Roundtable spun off DONORS TRUST and DONORS</div><div>CAPITAL FUND, which enable donors to fund anonymously, in this case</div><div>disinformation via Heartland. IRS-0E, IRS-7F</div><div>I.1 Philanthropy Roundtable321</div><div>This is a main coordinating body for conservative donors, founded 1987:322</div><div>‘The Philanthropy Roundtable is a national association of individual donors,</div><div>corporate giving officers, and foundation trustees and staff. The Roundtable</div><div>attracts philanthropists who benefit from being part of an organization dedicated</div><div>to helping them achieve their charitable objectives. In addition to offering expert</div><div>advice and counsel, the Roundtable puts donors in touch with peers who share</div><div>similar concerns and interests. ….</div><div>“The Roundtable is the leading voice in philanthropy for objectivity, integrity,</div><div>open-mindedness, and stewardship with a commitment to measurable results.”</div><div>-John M. Templeton Jr., chairman and president, John Templeton Foundation’</div><div>The 2011 William E. Simon Prize for Philanthropic Leadership went to</div><div>Charles G. Koch.323</div><div> Fig. F.4 ($tobacco) recipients are in red.</div><div>
</div><div>320 MAS2010 pp.68-69 showed ExxonMobil and other known foundations, an</div><div>unusually small fraction. p.93 showed then-known totals.</div><div>321 www.philanthropyroundtable.org</div><div>It is unknown if this helped create the network of funders and fundees shown in</div><div>MAS2010a pp.93-95, but the timing is interesting.</div><div>322 www.philanthropyroundtable.org/who_we_are/about_us</div><div>323www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/market_bas</div><div>ed_man This is well worth reading. He was a major funder of the Institute for</div><div>Humane Studies (GMU), CATO, Mercatus Center (GMU) …. MAS2010a p.93</div><div>Philanthropy Roundtable Board:324 (@: past affiliations)</div><div>Michael Grebe Chairman; President /CEO of L&H Bradley Fnd</div><div>James Pierson Vice-Chairman; President of William E. Simon Fnd;</div><div>Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow</div><div>American Spectator Fnd Board; Hoover Instn Board</div><div>Donors Trust Board, §I.3</div><div>John Tyler Secretary; VP/corp scty,Ewing Marion Kauffman Fn</div><div>325</div><div>Don Weinberg Treas.; Chair/EVP of Harry&Jeanette Weinberg Fnd</div><div>Ana Thompson Fin Com. Chr;Exec Dir, Charles &Mary Schwab Fnd</div><div>Daniel S. Peters Board; President Lovett & Ruth Peters Foundation</div><div>Jeff D. Sandefer Board; Acton School of Business. (energy investor)</div><div>Staff includes:326</div><div>Adam Myerson President; was VP@ Heritage Foundation 1993-2001.</div><div>@Wall Street Journal 1979-1983.</div><div>Donors Capital Chairman of the Board</div><div>Shannon Toronto COO; @Ex. Dir Marriner S. Eccles Foundation (UT)</div><div>Kari Barbic Assoc. Editor, Philanthropy; @ Weekly Standard.</div><div>Michael Horn Membership Manager; @Charles G. Koch Fnd;</div><div>@Koch intern at State Policy Network</div><div>Jo Kwong Dir. Economic Opportunity Programs</div><div>@Institute for Humane Studies,</div><div>@Capital Research Center, @ATLAS</div><div>Patrice Lee Project Mgr, Public Policy; @ C.G. Koch Associate</div><div>Christopher Levenick Editor-in-Chief, Philanthropy; @ AEI</div><div>Suzi Marchena Dir. Finance & HR; @Heritage Foundation</div><div>Lindsay Miller Annual Meeting Director; @ALEC</div><div>Anthony Penta Dep. Dir K-12 Education Pgms; @Acton in MI,</div><div>@grad of C. G. Koch Associates Program.</div><div>Evan Sparks Managing Editor, Philanthropy; @AEI.</div><div>Amanda Telford Dir of Development; @Frontiers of Freedom.</div><div>Rachel Verdejo Grant Writer; @ Grove City College B.A. 2008.</div><div>
</div><div>324 www.philanthropyroundtable.org/who_we_are/board/</div><div>325 This is a huge foundation ($1.8B). www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=436064859</div><div>326 www.philanthropyroundtable.org/who_we_are/staff/</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>66</div><div>I.2 Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund</div><div>Donors Trust Board327</div><div>Whitney L. Ball President & CEO;@CATO, @Philanthropy Roundtable</div><div>Kimberly O. Dennis Chairman; President, Searle Freedom Trust</div><div>@ AEI, @Philanthropy Roundtable,</div><div>@John M. Olin, @Inst for Humane Studies (GMU),</div><div>@PRI, @PERC.</div><div>James Pierson Vice-Chairman;</div><div>Vice-Chair Philanthropy Roundtable,</div><div>President of William E. Simon Foundation;</div><div>Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow</div><div>American Spectator Fnd Board;</div><div>Board, Hoover Institution</div><div>Donors Trust Board, §I.3</div><div>Nathaniel C. MoffatMoffat freelance writer; @Heritage Foundation</div><div>William J. Hume Board; Chairman of Basic American, Inc.</div><div>Board, Heritage Foundation</div><div>Board, Hoover Institution</div><div>Jeffrey C. Zysik CFO & Chief of Information Technology</div><div>@ KPMG; accountancy, @J.D from GMU</div><div>Donors Capital Staff (besides Ball and Zysik)</div><div>Joy L. Simington Finance and Administration Director;</div><div>@asst to COO The Independent Women’s Forum328</div><div>Lauren B. Vander Heyden Client Services Coordinator;</div><div>was at C.G. Koch Fnd, BA from Grove City College.</div><div>
</div><div>327 https://www.donorstrust.org/directors_staff.html</div><div>www.nndb.com/org/822/000214180/</div><div>328 www.iwf.org</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Independent_Women%27s_Forum</div><div>Shared premises and staff with Americans for Prosperity for 5+ years.</div><div>“In May, 2010 IWF started supporting a group called Balanced Education for</div><div>Everyone whose goal is to stop the teaching of global warming in U.S. schools.</div><div>The group calls global warming "junk science," and claims teaching it scares</div><div>children unnecessarily. The group started its national effort at a meeting of the</div><div>Mesa County, Colorado District 51 School Board, where it presented the board</div><div>with a petition containing 600-700 signatures of people who want global warming</div><div>instruction stopped. “</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Balanced_Education_for_Everyone</div><div>Donors Capital Board329</div><div>Adam Myerson Chair; President, Philanthropy Roundtable</div><div>VP@ Heritage Foundation 1993-2001.</div><div>Kimberly O. Dennis Vice Chair; Chair Donors Trust;</div><div>President, Searle Freedom Trust</div><div>@ AEI, @Philanthropy Roundtable,</div><div>@John M. Olin, @Inst for Humane Studies (GMU),</div><div>@PRI, @PERC.</div><div>Whitney L. Ball President ; President & CEO Donors Trust;</div><div>@CATO, @Philanthropy Roundtable</div><div>Christopher DeMuth Director; D.C. Searle Senior Fellow, AEI</div><div>Steven Hayward Director; F.K Weyerhaeuser Fellow, AEI,</div><div>Senior Fellow PRI,</div><div>grant advisor, Searle Freedom Trust.</div><div>Trustee Philadelphia Society, IER.</div><div>Kris Alan Mauren Director; Exec. Dir. The Acton Institute</div><div>@ President PRI</div><div>William H. Mellor Director; President, Institute for Justice</div><div>Stephen Moore Director; senior economics write/editorial board at</div><div>Wall Street Journal. @Senior Fellow CATO,</div><div>@Heritage Foundation, @founder Club for Growth</div><div>John van Kannon Director; VP The Heritage Foundation</div><div>@VP Pacific Legal Foundation</div><div>The 3 boards here are interlocked, and they with the main funders of the</div><div>various conservative think tanks. A few Philanthropy Roundtable</div><div>foundations seem outliers, like Schwab, which has a very different</div><div>donation pattern. Some donations go to entities people would normally</div><div>consider charities, but much of the money goes to advocacy think tanks.</div><div>Almost every think tank mentioned here took Philip Morris tobacco</div><div>funding 1993-2001. Most foundations here have funded those think tanks</div><div>alongside Philip Morris. This may help the reader assess the claims made</div><div>by these entities regarding their missions.</div><div>Following are brief descriptions of Donors Trust and Capital Fund.</div><div>
</div><div>329 https://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/home.html</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>67</div><div>Donors Trust330</div><div> history is:331</div><div>“Donors Trust was launched in 1999 in collaboration with a small group of</div><div>founding donors and nonprofit executives actively engaged in supporting and</div><div>promoting our free society as understood in America's founding documents.</div><div>The founders of Donors Trust recognized the need for philanthropic resources</div><div>and services to help donors effectively manage their charitable giving. Moreover,</div><div>it was clear to them that there was no infrastructure dedicated to a nationwide</div><div>community of liberty-minded donors and organizations.</div><div>Donors Trust was established as the sole donor-advised plan dedicated to</div><div>promoting a free society and serving donors who share that purpose. To date,</div><div>Donors Trust has received $313 million from these donors who are both</div><div>dedicated to liberty and to the cause of perpetuating a free and prosperous</div><div>society through philanthropic means. Since inception, Donors Trust has granted</div><div>out over $263 million to nearly 1000 liberty-minded332 charities.”</div><div>Donors Trust (and its related Donors Capital Fund)</div><div>333 334 form a tightlycoupled</div><div>spinoff of Philanthropy Roundtable, run by Whitney Ball:</div><div>335</div><div>“Before launching Donors Trust, Ball served as executive director of The</div><div>Philanthropy Roundtable, as well as director of development at the Cato Institute</div><div>in Washington, D.C. She was also director of finance for the National Journalism</div><div>Center and circulation manager of Consumers’ Research magazine. She</div><div>currently serves on the boards of Donors Trust, Donors Capital Fund, and the</div><div>State Policy Network.</div><div>PHILANTHROPY: Please tell us how a donor-advised fund works and sketch</div><div>the current landscape of fund-providers.</div><div>
</div><div>330https://www.donorstrust.org</div><div>www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=522166327</div><div>331 https://www.donorstrust.org/history.html</div><div>332 Many of whose idea of liberty is that of tobacco companies to addict children.</div><div>333 https://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/home.html</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Donors_Capital_Fund</div><div>334 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=541934032</div><div>335 www.nndb.com/people/971/000214329/</div><div>MS. BALL: A donor-advised fund begins with a donor</div><div>contributing cash or assets to a public charity, which in turn</div><div>creates a separate account for the donor, who may recommend</div><div>disbursements from the fund to other public charities.</div><div>Technically, the charity that sponsors the fund has final say</div><div>on the disbursements, and it is legally required to ensure they go only to</div><div>charitable purposes, but in normal circumstances the original donor’s requests</div><div>will be followed. …</div><div>Donors Trust, where I work, serves donors dedicated to the ideals of limited</div><div>government, personal responsibility, and free enterprise. These philosophical</div><div>fund-providers may contribute to a wide range of grantees—everything from</div><div>social welfare groups, arts and culture institutions, research centers, and more—</div><div>but always with the goal of advancing the philosophy they share with their</div><div>donors. …</div><div>I suspect a desire to eliminate anonymous giving may be behind the push for</div><div>pay-out regulations and for banning foundation grants to donor-advised funds.</div><div>That’s a bad idea in my opinion. …”</div><div>This arrangement lessens overhead for small donors. For large donors, it</div><div>offers anonymity, because the funds are provided in the Donors</div><div>Capital/Trust name. Hence, any of the big donors {Kochs, Scaife, Bradley,</div><div>Searle, etc} could give money directly to 501(c)(3) Donors, rather than via</div><div>their own foundations, whose gifts must be listed in their 990s.</div><div>Donors Capital Fund is:336</div><div>“Donors Capital Fund is an IRS-approved, 501(c)(3), 509(a)(3) supporting</div><div>organization that is associated with Donors Trust, a public charity and donoradvised</div><div>fund formed to safeguard the charitable intent of donors who are</div><div>dedicated to the ideals of limited government, personal responsibility, and free</div><div>enterprise.337</div><div>As a rule, Donors Trust refers clients to Donors Capital Fund if they expect</div><div>to open donor-advised funds of over $1,000,000. In turn, the Fund provides</div><div>personalized philanthropic services and specialized asset management for all</div><div>clients with accounts that carry balances of $1,000,000 or more.</div><div>All contributions to donor-advised funds held by Donors Capital Fund are tax</div><div>deductible under Section 170 of the IRS Code. ”</div><div>
</div><div>336 https://www.donorstrust.org/dcf/home.html</div><div>337 And apparently, climate anti-science disinformation via Heartland.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>68</div><div>Donors Trust/Capital does not reveal donors, but lists some recipients:</div><div>“As a rule, Donors Capital Fund will only disburse grants to liberty-minded</div><div>public charities that do not rely on large amounts of government funding. A</div><div>broad variety of charities fall under the umbrella of liberty including research</div><div>hospitals, religious organizations, private schools, universities, fraternities,</div><div>volunteer fire departments, and museums in addition to public-policy</div><div>organizations.”</div><div>As before, Fig. F.4 tobacco-funded entities are in red:</div><div> “Acton Institute</div><div> Africa Fighting Malaria International338</div><div> American Conservative Union Foundation</div><div> American Enterprise Institute</div><div> Art Institute of Chicago</div><div> Atlas Economic Research Foundation339</div><div> Boy Scouts of America</div><div> Capital Research Center</div><div> Cato Institute</div><div> Chicago Shakespeare Theater</div><div> Clemson University Foundation</div><div> Competitive Enterprise Institute</div><div> Evergreen Freedom Foundation</div><div> Federalist Society</div><div> Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center</div><div> Goldwater Institute</div><div> Goodwill Industries</div><div> Grove City College</div><div> Habitat for Humanity</div><div> Heritage Foundation</div><div> Hillsdale College</div><div> Hudson Institute</div><div> Institute for Jewish & Community Resources</div><div> Institute for Justice</div><div> Los Angeles Orthopaedic Hospital Foundation</div><div> Leadership Institute</div><div> Manhattan Institute</div><div> Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center</div><div>
</div><div>338 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Africa_Fighting_Malaria</div><div>339www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Atlas_Economic_Research_Foundation</div><div>This specializes in fostering new think tanks.</div><div> Mercatus Center at George Mason University</div><div> Middle East Forum</div><div> National Right to Work Foundation</div><div> Reason Foundation</div><div> Salvation Army</div><div> Shriners Hospitals for Children</div><div> St. Jude's Hospital</div><div> St. Matthew School</div><div> State Policy Network</div><div> Young America's Foundation”</div><div>Many of these are policy advocacy/marketing/lobbying entities,</div><div>interspersed with organizations anyone would consider charities.</div><div>From study of many 990s, individual donors balance those in very different</div><div>proportions. The DONORS structure masks any given donor’s identify but</div><div>§0.4 shows that DONORS tends to fund the same organizations as L&H</div><div>Bradley, the Koch brothers and Richard Mellon Scaife, among others.</div><div>The 990s for DONORS have not been analyzed in detail, except for</div><div>donations to Heartland, §H.</div><div>However, from the data there alone, I allege that DONORS has seriously</div><div>violated 501(c)(3) rules by funding factually-untruthful activities that</div><div>cannot qualify. IRS-0E</div><div>The itemizations in Fig. H.1.5 specify purposes and some of the general</div><div>support money goes to E&CN, pervaded with violations.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>69</div><div>K. CSCDGC, CO2Science, SPPI and Ferguson</div><div>K.1 A tax-free Idso family business</div><div>From its 990s, 340</div><div> the charity Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and</div><div>Global Change (CSDCGC) 341 based near Tempe, AZ, is the Idso family</div><div>business, 2002-2008:</div><div>Sherwood B. Idso, President (Father)</div><div>Craig D. Idso, Treasurer/CEO (involved in NIPCC)</div><div>Keith Idso, Vice President</div><div>M. Ann Idso, Secretary (Craig’s wife)</div><div>Robert E. Ferguson, None (Added in 2009-2010)</div><div>The IRS states:</div><div>“Irrespective of size, a governing board should include independent</div><div>members and should not be dominated by employees or others who are not, by</div><div>their very nature, independent individuals because of family or business</div><div>relationships.”</div><div>342</div><div> IRS-6G.</div><div>CSCDGC 2002-2008 statement of purpose was:</div><div>“Discovering and disseminating scientific information pertaining to the effects of</div><div>the atmospheric carbon dioxide enrichment on climate and the biosphere”</div><div>And their accomplishments were:</div><div>“Disseminating factual reports and sound commentary on new developments in</div><div>the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological</div><div>consequences of the ongoing rise in the air's carbon dioxide content.”</div><div>By 2009 this changed to:</div><div>“The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change was created to</div><div>disseminate factual reports and sound343 commentary on new developments In</div><div>the world-wide scientific quest to determine the climatic and biological</div><div>consequences of the ongoing rise In the air's CO2 content. It meets this objective</div><div>through weekly online publication of its CO2 Science magazine, which contains</div><div>editorials on topics of current concern and mini-reviews of recently published</div><div>peer-reviewed Scientific Journal articles, books, and other educational materials</div><div>In this endeavor, the Center attempts to separate reality from rhetoric in the</div><div>
</div><div>340 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=860902777</div><div>These seem sloppy. 2006,2007 shows 0/hours/week; 2008 has no titles.</div><div>341www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_the_Study_of_Carbon_Dioxi</div><div>de_and_Global_Change Discusses the fossil relationships.</div><div>342 www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/governance_practices.pdf p.3</div><div>343 “sound science”</div><div>emotionally-charged debate that swirls around the subject of carbon dioxide</div><div>and global change. In addition, to help students and teachers gain greater</div><div>insight into the biological aspects of this phenomenon, the Center maintains online</div><div>Instructions on how to conduct CO 2 enrichment and depletion experiments</div><div>in its Global Change Laboratory (located in its Education Center sect.”</div><div>The Idso’s actually have published peer-reviewed papers, but relatively</div><div>few in last decade and the papers have generally been minor or weak.344</div><div>
</div><div>Most of their work has emphasized the selective benefits of CO2 enrichment</div><div>for some plants, while ignoring any downsides. In addition, Craig seems</div><div>to help E&CN by cherry-picking science articles and then overinterpreting</div><div>them for general audiences. This is a rare case of creating</div><div>real, but easily-misleading science, §0.7.</div><div>Finally, Craig got involved with NIPCC, likely the reason for the large</div><div>revenue and salary rises from 2006 onward. IRS-0E</div><div>Quick searches found a few of the usual donors, Fig. K.1.1, next page.</div><div>Four separate payments were made (red) by Lambe, Bradley and</div><div>DONORS that were labeled CSCDGC, but were sent to Ferguson’s</div><div>addresses in Haymarket, VA. SPPI is part of CSCDGC, certainly does no</div><div>science, does attack people, and the financial arrangement seems odd.</div><div>Did CSCDGC count this in its public support? IRS-0E, IRS-7F.</div><div>CSCDGC has enjoyed a big boost in revenue 2007-2010. CSCDGC</div><div>showed a huge jump in contract labor. Where did the money go? IRS-7F.</div><div>Ferguson was the highest paid employee in 2009345</div><div>, and in 2010 earned</div><div>more than all the others together.</div><div>Without access to IRS data ,it is impossible to know, but it seems almost</div><div>certain that CSCDGC boosted its income and salaries by becoming a</div><div>subcontractor for Heartland starting in 2007-.</div><div>CSCDGC and CO2Science seem not to be registered as AZ charities.</div><div>346</div><div>
</div><div>344scholar.google.com/scholar?q=idso&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=1%2C5&as</div><div>sdtp=on</div><div>345 He may work hard, but $321K for a tiny operation is unusual in charities.</div><div>346 www.azsos.gov/scripts/Charity_Search.dll search for carbon, co2science.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>70</div><div>A plausible interpretation of this data is:</div><div>? Ferguson tried to create a major anti-science effort at FoF, funded by</div><div>ExxonMobil, but with help from a few of the foundations that fund</div><div>such things, IRS-8P</div><div>? For whatever reasons, this did not work out.</div><div>Ferguson spun off his own SPPI, with the foundation help funneled</div><div>through CSCDGC, a charity, unlike SPPI.</div><div>? Checks were written to CSCDGC, but at Ferguson’s address in VA.</div><div>? CSCDGC became a subcontractor for DONORS money, routed</div><div>through Heartland.</div><div>gray: 990s exists, does not seem to list grantees</div><div>Fig. K.1.1 Money to FoF, CSCDG, SPPI</div><div>a. Donations to Frontiers of Freedom 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>Ferguson at FoF, SPPI/CSCDGC SPPI, but not 501(c)3, really CSCDGC</div><div>Aequus Institute, NY 1,000</div><div>Donner Foundation, NY 10,000</div><div>Earhart Foundation, VA</div><div>ExxonMobil Foundation 50,000</div><div> Seem missing from 2003 990 95,000</div><div>"Global Climate Change Outreach" 90,000</div><div>EMF Total: "Project Support - Climate Change" 40,000</div><div>575,000 Project Support - Science Center & Climate Change" 70,000</div><div>"Climate Change" 50,000</div><div>"Climate Change Efforts" 90,000</div><div>"General Support for Science and Policy Center" 90,000</div><div>General Motors F 20,000 35,000</div><div>Claude R. Lambe (Kochs) "General Operating Support" 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000</div><div>IDT Charitable F, NJ 10,000</div><div>True Foundation, WY 1,000 1,000 1,000</div><div>DONORS TRUST "science project" (really? What kinds of "science projects" has FoF done? ) 7,500 In 2008 990, specified as 2007 grant</div><div>TOTAL 146,000 295,000 196,000 141,000 58,500</div><div>Stop funding FoF, money shifts to CSCDGC/SPPI</div><div>b. Donations to CSCDGC 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>Sarah Scaife Foundation 50,000</div><div>ExxonMobil Foundation 25,000 10,000</div><div>Claude Lambe F (Kochs) 25,000 35,000 25,000 To CSCDGC, but Haymarket, VA, i.e., Ferguson</div><div>L&H Bradley "To support the Science and Public Policy Institute" 50,000</div><div>DONORS CAPITAL "For the organization's surface station report" To CSCDGC, at Ferguson's home 129,400</div><div>DONORS CAPITAL "for Science and Public Policy Institute" To CSCDGC, at Ferguson's home 29,400</div><div>TOTAL 50,000 25,000 60,000 10,000 25,000 129,400 79,400</div><div>The 2008-2009 foundation boost does not account for theirmuch larger boost in CSCDGC public support (next page).</div><div>Conjecture: the bulk of the new money is: ?? ==> DONORS ==> Heartland ==> CSCDGC/SPPI.</div><div>CSCDGC 990 data from next page:</div><div>Direct Public Support 1a III.1 262,575 244,537 146,322 316,810 300,554 674,725 1,065,971 1,548,145 877,417</div><div>2001</div><div>90,000 40,000</div><div>90,000 40,000</div><div>Frontiers of Freedom included:</div><div>(a) FoF Insitute, Inc. 501(c)(3) revoked</div><div>(b) FoF Inc 501(c)4</div><div>(c) FoF Foundation 501(c)(3) revoked</div><div>WIhtin FoF, Ferguson ran Center for Science and</div><div>Public Policy (CSPP) , 2003-2007, Z.2007.02-3.</div><div>Obviously ExxonMobil Foundation was the main</div><div>funder, but some of the big foundations (Donner,</div><div>Earhart, Lambe) showed up to help in a</div><div>coordinated effort., IRS-8P.</div><div>DONORS TRUST appeared at the end.</div><div>Ferguson then started SPPI.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>71</div><div>Fig. K.1.2 CSCDGC, CO2Science finances</div><div>The next section describes CO2Science.</div><div>a. CSCDGC finance, 990 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010</div><div>K1 Direct Public Support 1a III.1 262,575 244,537 146,322 316,810 300,554 674,725 1,065,971 1,548,145 877,417</div><div>K4 Program Service Rev 2 9 4,393 119,072</div><div>K10 TOTAL REVENUE 12 12 263,256 245,015 146,554 316,892 300,563 674,725 1,065,971 1,552,628 1,001,003</div><div>K11 Expense - Program Services 13 III.4e 271,243 264,368 124,982 282,339 327,770 525,200</div><div>K12 Printing and Publications II.38 158 2,183 55,869</div><div>K13 Contract Labor 1,500 73,228 18,600 38,300 345,791 233,842</div><div>K14 TOTAL EXPENSES 17 18 295,526 284,679 142,788 293,739 337,484 558,467 773,072 1,223,948 1,055,718</div><div>K15 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES 18 19 -32,270 -39,664 3,766 23,153 -36,921 116,258 292,669 328,680 -54,715</div><div>K17 Net Assets, end of year 21 22 185,071 145,407 68,179 91,332 54,411 170,669 463,338 792,017 737,302</div><div>K21 Public Support % 15.91% 92.36% 93.40% 96.12% 98.80% 98.50% 36.43% 63.94% 37.53%</div><div>Sherwood Idso, President Salaries 70,800 50,000 30,000 43,750 60,800 68,580 50,000 87,500 30,833</div><div>Craig D. Idso, Treasurer/CEO 47,500 135,156 28,333 74,167 57,000 72,000 79,000 111,667 113,333</div><div>Keith E Idso. Vice-President 22,133 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0</div><div>M Ann Idso, Secretary 0 0 16,667 23,167 27,000 45,000 52,000 95,000 90,000</div><div>Robert Ferguson 247,500 312,500</div><div>TOTAL Salaries 140,433 185,156 75,000 141,084 144,800 185,580 181,000 541,667 546,666</div><div>K20 Grants (to CO2Science) 22 0 0 0 58,016 31,000 20,000</div><div>b. CO2Science finance, 990</div><div>K31 Direct Public Support 1a III.1 68,077 88,376 38,000 66,398 57,081 10,101</div><div>K40 TOTAL REVENUE 12 12 68,077 88,376 38,000 66,806 57,081 10,184</div><div>K41 Expense - Program Services 13 III.4e 33,150 85,573 49,496</div><div>K44 TOTAL EXPENSES 17 18 34,933 87,536 49,566 77,308 45,772 28,015</div><div>K45 REVENUE LESS EXPENSES 18 19 33,144 840 -11,566 -10,502 11,309 -17,831</div><div>K47 Net Assets, end of year 21 22 33,144 33,984 22,418 11,916 23,225 5,394</div><div>K51 Public Support % These look very strange ==> 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 0.00% 0.00% 99.97%</div><div>Craig D. Idso, President Salary (only officer/director listed on 990) 0 44,688 22,500 45,000 37,500 22,500</div><div> Lines</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>72</div><div>K.2 CO2Science – Craig’s subsidiary</div><div>CO2Science347 is effectively a 501(c)(3)subsidiary run by Craig Idso.</div><div>Primary Exempt Purpose (2005)</div><div>“The character of affairs of the corporation are: research, writing, education, and</div><div>the publication of scientific information pertaining to the effects of earth's rising</div><div>atmospheric CO2 concentration on the biosphere”</div><div>Accomplishments (2005)</div><div>“Specific achievement objectives include producing film documentaries, writing</div><div>major reports, conducting original scientific research, and educational outreach</div><div>activities on an internet website. in additionCO2Science assists individuals and</div><div>corporations in compiling greenhouse gas emission reports and in developing</div><div>greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.”</div><div>By the 990, President Craig Idso seems the only real paid employee,</div><div>although with Sherwood and Keith also having titles. IRS-6G.</div><div>CSCDGC (Craig Idso, Treasurer) has sent grants to CO2Science (Craig</div><div>Idso, President). IRS-7F.</div><div>Grants were given for “Scientific Research,” included in Fig. K.1.2 on</div><div>previous page. Comparing K20.2007 and K40.2007, $20K was granted,</div><div>but only $10K arrived. The public support percentages seem odd.</div><div>CO2Science seems designed to cherry-pick research that supports the Idso</div><div>view that increased CO2 is only good in every possible way. It offers</div><div>simple experiments that show some plants grow better with more CO2.</div><div>This seems silly, given that CO2 is quite often used in sealed</div><div>greenhouses.</div><div>348</div><div> Poison ivy and kudzu grow better with more CO2, which</div><div>seems to receive little notice.</div><div>
</div><div>347 www.co2science.org</div><div>www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=202778308</div><div>348 www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/facts/00-077.htm</div><div>Serious growers know all this and use CO2 for high-value crops where all</div><div>necessary water, sunlight, nutrients, temperature are optimized (Liebig’s Law of</div><div>the Minimum rules). Any farmer knows that lack of water or nutrients are often</div><div>the limiters. I learned this by the time I was 10. Even 2000ppm CO2 will not grow</div><div>corn in the Sahara, without much more water and better soil.</div><div>Craig’s Bio states:</div><div>349</div><div> (materials fit IRS-0E):</div><div>Dr. Idso received his B.S. in Geography from Arizona State University, his M.S.</div><div>in Agronomy from the University of Nebraska - Lincoln, and his Ph.D. in</div><div>Geography from Arizona State University, … Since 1998, he has been the editor</div><div>and a chief contributor to the online magazine CO2 Science.</div><div>Dr Idso is the author of several books, the most recent of which, The Many</div><div>Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment, details 55 ways in which the modern</div><div>rise in atmospheric CO2 is benefiting earth's biosphere. Dr. Idso has also</div><div>produced three video documentaries, Carbon Dioxide and the Climate Crisis:</div><div>Reality or Illusion?, Carbon Dioxide and the Climate Crisis: Avoiding Plant and</div><div>Animal Extinctions, and Carbon Dioxide and the Climate Crisis: Doing the</div><div>Right Thing, … he is the former Director of Environmental Science at Peabody</div><div>Energy350 in St. Louis, Missouri.”</div><div>The Idso’s have PhDs and have published peer-reviewed research,</div><div>351 but</div><div>not much in last decade,352 and it can be characterized as:</div><div>? Straightforward data analysis, with no startling results.353</div><div>? Weak attempts to cast doubt on mainstream science.</div><div>354</div><div>Results are then selectively interpreted for a general audience. This is</div><div>straight from the tobacco playbook in funding PhDs to do research that can</div><div>be used to confuse the public.355</div><div> IRS-0E</div><div>Craig co-edited NIPCC reports. IRS-0E</div><div>Starting in 2007, Sherwood and especially Craig contributed quotes and</div><div>articles for E&CN, §X.4, IRS-0E.</div><div>
</div><div>349 www.co2science.org/about/chairman.php ; desmogblog.com/craig-idso</div><div>350 Peabody is the world’s largest private coal company. He was there 2001-2002.</div><div>351 These attributes are very useful, as they impress the public.</div><div>352scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=</div><div>&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=cd+idso&as_publication=&as_ylo</div><div>=2002&as_yhi=2011&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdtf=&as_sdts=5&hl=en</div><div>353 www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231002001590 for example</div><div>354Robert C. Balling, Jr, Craig D. Idso, Analysis of adjustments to the United</div><div>States Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) temperature database.</div><div>“our results strongly suggest that the present set of adjustments spuriously increase</div><div>the long-term trend.” Their results were based on radiosondes and UAH satellites,</div><div>which were proved spuriously low, as many had long thought, §Y.1.</div><div>www.norcalblogs.com/watts/docs/USHCN_Balling_2002GL014825.pdf</div><div>355 PRO2012 p.271,289-290, “The goal was distraction or red-herring research,…”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>73</div><div>K.3 Robert Ferguson and SPPI (fake entity)</div><div>The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI)356 is essentially Robert</div><div>Ferguson 357 with a website by Joe Marshall (SIRE Studios).</div><div>358 Ferguson</div><div>had run an ExxonMobil-funded operation within Frontiers of Freedom</div><div>(FF/CSPP) from 2003-2007 and participated in other climate anti-science</div><div>groups. In 2007, he formed SPPI and helped fakexpert Viscount</div><div>Christopher Monckton in an (unsuccessful) attack on Naomi Oreskes.359</div><div>
</div><div>His advisors include Monckton, William Kininmonth, Robert Carter, Craig</div><div>Idso, Joe D’Aleo and David Legates,360 all but Legates involved with</div><div>NIPCC, §E. Apparently, Ferguson had claimed charity status, but never</div><div>filed 990s, and the status was automatically revoked.361</div><div>As of 01/26/12, the contact address for SPPI was a PO box in a UPS store:</div><div>“Robert Ferguson</div><div>Science and Public Policy Institute</div><div>5501 Merchants View Square # 209</div><div>Haymarket, VA 20169”</div><div>362</div><div>A laudatory profile of Ferguson can be found in Heartland’s E&CN,</div><div>Z.2007.02-3 and he is an E&CN Contributing Editor, §X.</div><div>
</div><div>356 scienceandpublicpolicy.org</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Science_and_Public_Policy_Institute</div><div>357 MAS2010, p.122.</div><div>358 www.linkedin.com/in/jrmarshall He is another GMU graduate:</div><div>“George Mason University - School of Management Marketing Major and</div><div>Economics Minor graduate with substantial in house, grassroots marketing</div><div>experience, especially on the political level of campaigning, speaking</div><div>engagements, promotions, web marketing and more.”</div><div>359 www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-journal-publishes-plagiarized-paper</div><div>360 MAS2010, p.4 listed all but Kininmonth, who was not so obviously involved.</div><div>361 www2.guidestar.org/organizations/62-1694476/science-public-policyinstitute.aspx</div><div>362 scienceandpublicpolicy.org/contact.html</div><div>Via Google Maps, this is seen to be a PO box in a UPS store:</div><div>maps.google.com/maps?q=5501+Merchants+View+Square+%23+209+Haymarke</div><div>t,+VA+20169&hl=en&sll=37.0625,-</div><div>95.677068&sspn=53.432436,103.886719&vpsrc=0&hnear=5501+Merchants+Vie</div><div>w+Square,+Haymarket,+Virginia+20169&t=h&z=17</div><div>www.whitepages.com locates him about 10 minutes’ walk from the UPS store.</div><div>www.whois.net/whois/scienceandpublicpolicy.org</div><div>CSCDGC may pass more money to SPPI. The Koch brothers control the</div><div>Charles R. Lambe Foundation,</div><div>363 whose 2007 Form 990, p.25 says:</div><div>“Grants are generally restricted to public charity organizations as defined in</div><div>section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The Foundation does not make</div><div>grants to individuals or for-profit corporations.”</div><div>(Lambe, Bradley, DONORS and perhaps other unknown entities)</div><div>CSDCGC</div><div>Ferguson (SPPI and UTAH Climate.org)</div><div>One might think UTAH Climate.org364 had something to do with Utah.</div><div>That website never mentions Ferguson, although it links to SPPI and</div><div>CO2Science. However, from an Internet WHOIS search, one finds:365</div><div>“Domain Name:UTAHCLIMATE.ORG</div><div>Created On:10-Dec-2009 19:56:41 UTC …</div><div>Registrant Name:Robert Ferguson</div><div>Registrant Street1:15230 Championship Dr. …</div><div>Admin Organization:Science and Public Policy Institute</div><div>Tech Name:Joe Marshall</div><div>From the start,</div><div>366SPPI has generated standard climate disinformation and</div><div>attacks on climate science and scientists. IRS-0E</div><div>SPPI has often presented the work of Viscount Christopher Monckton as</div><div>though it were credible science.367</div><div>Ferguson is well-connected with other anti-science think tanks,368 not just</div><div>Heartland, for which he has been a Contributing Editor. For example,</div><div>following is a connection with GMI and Will Happer.</div><div>
</div><div>363 www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=480935563</div><div>364 utahclimate.org/</div><div>365 www.whois.net/whois/utahclimate.org.com</div><div>366 MAS2008, the attack on Naomi Oreskes, by Monckton and Ferguson, IRS-3E.</div><div>367 scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton Papers>Monckton Collection</div><div>368 MAS2008 p.40. Tracking Ferguson’s collection of “advisors” actually started</div><div>me looking at the social networks, leading to MAS2010 and this report.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>74</div><div>Princeton atomic physicist Will Happer is a quite-distinguished expert in</div><div>that field, but has been Chairman of GMI since 2006, was one of the</div><div>organizers of the APS petition 369 and is vocal in his rejection of</div><div>mainstream climate science. He testified about climate change to the US</div><div>Senate, 02/25/09370 and a 2nd copy is found at GMI in Happer’s profile. 371</div><div>Ferguson annotated it, inserting many links to CSCDGC and SPPI articles,</div><div>including pieces by Monckton, but disclaiming:372</div><div>“All footnoted cross references added by SPPI; not in original and not by or</div><div>associated with Dr. Happer. Their intent is to provide interested readers with</div><div>related material for consideration.”</div><div>Ferguson calls this a “Reprint,” but the net effect is to “meme-wash” lowcredibility</div><div>anti-science by modifying Senate testimony so it looks official.</div><div>The Happer Lab website at Princeton features:373</div><div>“On February 25th, 2009, Will Happer spoke before the Committee on</div><div>Environment and Public Works in the U.S. Senate about climate change and</div><div>carbon dioxide. There are several places on the web where you can find his</div><div>testimony—here are two:</div><div>? The Environment and Public Works Blog</div><div>? The Science and Public Policy Institute”</div><div>The annotated “Reprint” was acceptable to the Happer Lab. The reader</div><div>might wonder that the Happer Lab did not link to the copy at GMI, but</div><div>maybe that connection was deemed unimportant.</div><div>
</div><div>369 MAS2009. The most recent OpEd’s use of “gulags” is similar in tone.</div><div>online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html</div><div>?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop#mjQuickSave</div><div>370epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=84462</div><div>e2d-6bff-4983-a574-31f5ae8e8a42 In Congressional hearings, the minority party</div><div>gets to name a few witnesses. James Inhofe is EPW’s Ranking Member, known</div><div>for calling such fakexperts as Michael Crichton, Z.2005.12-4. So, Happer testified</div><div>on climate, labeled a Princeton professor, rather than GMI Chairman.</div><div>371 www.marshall.org/experts.php?id=57 for Happer profile and articles</div><div>GMI CEO O’Keefe is a 25-year veteran of API.</div><div>372scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/happer_testimony.pdf</div><div>Google this URL and see where it appears.</div><div>373 happerlab.princeton.edu/news/will-happer-testifies-us-senate-about-climatechange</div><div>K.4 Summary</div><div>“Charity” donations come to CSCDGC from unspecified sources, but the</div><div>fragmentary data includes ExxonMobil, Scaife, {Lambe, Bradley, and</div><div>DONORS}, of which the latter group sent money to CSCDGC, but at</div><div>Ferguson’s address. IRS-7F. The IRS might inquire about that.</div><div>CSCDGC’s governance is the Idso family. IRS-6G</div><div>I allege that CSCDGC needs investigation for possible violations of charity</div><div>rules on governance and finances, IRS-6G, IRS-7F.</div><div>Craig Idso is listed as a “science advisor” for SPPI, but, in his role as</div><div>CSCDGC Treasurer, pays Ferguson as an employee, unusually well for</div><div>executing a tiny operation.</div><div>I allege that CSCDGC and Ferguson violate charity rules on education</div><div>and research, IRS-0E. The nature of SPPI would have been difficult to</div><div>reconcile with CSCDGC’s claims to do science.</div><div>In any case, SPPI is a fake organization, a front for CSCDGC. The staff is</div><div>essentially Ferguson, with a cast of the usual “advisors.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>75</div><div>N. Nature, Science and AAAS.</div><div>N.1 Nature</div><div>In July 2011, Nature editorialized on Heartland:</div><div>“It would be easy for scientists to ignore the Heartland Institute's climate</div><div>conferences. They are curious affairs designed to gather and share</div><div>contrarian views, in which science is secondary to wild accusations and</div><div>political propaganda. They are easy to lampoon — delegates at the latest</div><div>meeting of the Chicago-based institute in Washington DC earlier this month</div><div>could pick up primers on the libertarian writings of Russian–American novelist</div><div>Ayn Rand, who developed the philosophical theory of objectivism, and</div><div>postcards depicting former US vice-president Al Gore as a fire-breathing</div><div>demon. And they are predictable, with environmentalists often portrayed as the</div><div>latest incarnation of a persistent communist plot. “Green on the outside, red on</div><div>the inside,” said one display. “Smash the watermelons!”</div><div>So why does Nature this week devote two pages to such absurdities? We now</div><div>have more than two decades of evidence that closing our eyes will not make the</div><div>climate sceptics go away. Instead, in the United States at least, they have</div><div>cemented their propaganda into a broader agenda that pits conservatives of</div><div>various stripes against almost any form of government regulation. The sceptics</div><div>like to present the battlefield as science, but, as the News Feature on page 440</div><div>makes clear, the fight is, in fact, a violent collision of world views.</div><div>Does the following sound familiar? “They distort science, ignore reality and will</div><div>not tolerate opinions or facts that conflict with their beliefs.” “Cynical</div><div>manipulators or simple pawns, their purpose is only to keep funds flowing to a</div><div>corrupt few who profit from the status quo.” Those are the kinds of words</div><div>scientists use, often correctly, to describe the sceptics, many of whom would</div><div>have the financial interests of today continue their dominance tomorrow. Yet this</div><div>is also how sceptics characterize climate scientists, whose careers and</div><div>reputations they claim are intertwined with protecting the science of</div><div>anthropogenic global warming.</div><div>To address this conflict might be seen as lending respectability to the spurious</div><div>claims made by sceptics against respected scientists and robust science. So, let's</div><div>be clear: Nature is not endorsing the Heartland Institute as a serious voice on</div><div>climate science. Instead, the News Feature is intended to offer researchers</div><div>outside climate science a window into the motives and tactics of those who have</div><div>set themselves up as such a voice. (Those inside climate science, of course, are</div><div>all too aware of these already.</div><div>Despite criticizing climate scientists for being overconfident about their data,</div><div>models and theories, the Heartland Institute proclaims a conspicuous confidence</div><div>in single studies and grand interpretations. A 2009 report by the</div><div>Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, which the institute</div><div>supports, is well sourced and based on scientific papers.374 Yet it makes many</div><div>bold assertions that are often questionable or misleading, and do not</div><div>highlight the uncertainties. Many climate sceptics seem to review scientific</div><div>data and studies not as scientists but as attorneys, magnifying doubts and treating</div><div>incomplete explanations as falsehoods rather than signs of progress towards the</div><div>truth. As the News Feature points out, although the sceptics feel that they have</div><div>already won the political battle in the United States, their attacks on science will</div><div>continue.</div><div>Scientists can only carry on with their work, addressing legitimate questions as</div><div>they arise and challenging misinformation. Many climate scientists have already</div><div>tried to engage with their critics, as they did at the Heartland event. The</div><div>difference, of course, is motive. Scientists work to fill the gaps in human</div><div>knowledge and to build a theory that can explain observations of the world.</div><div>Climate sceptics revel in such gaps, sometimes long after they have been</div><div>filled.</div><div>It is scientists, not sceptics, who are most willing to consider explanations that</div><div>conflict with their own. And far from quashing dissent, it is the scientists, not the</div><div>sceptics, who do most to acknowledge gaps in their studies and point out the</div><div>limitations of their data — which is where sceptics get much of the mud they</div><div>fling at the scientists. By contrast, the Heartland Institute and its ilk are not</div><div>trying to build a theory of anything. They have set the bar much lower, and</div><div>are happy muddying the waters.”</div><div>375</div><div>Heartland does not do science research, and when it claims to educate, it</div><div>is manufacturing confusion, IRS-0E. Of course, long experience with</div><div>tobacco companies is good training for anti-science.</div><div>Singer led the NIPCC effort and has even longer practice on climate.</div><div>
</div><div>374 A standard tactic is to include a blizzard of footnotes that most will never</div><div>examine and get the real messages across in summaries that contradict the cited</div><div>sources, or cherry-pick them, or confuse people about them.</div><div>375www.nature.com/nature/journal/v475/n7357/full/475423b.html?WT.ec_id=NA</div><div>TURE-20110728</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>76</div><div>N.2 Science</div><div>Sara Reardon wrote recently in Science376</div><div>‘The U.S. political debate over climate change is seeping into K-12 science</div><div>classrooms, and teachers are feeling the heat. …</div><div>“Evolution is still the big one, but climate change is catching up,” says Roberta</div><div>Johnson, executive director of the National Earth Science Teachers Association</div><div>(NESTA) in Boulder, Colorado. An informal survey this spring of 800 NESTA</div><div>members (see word cloud) found that climate change was second only to</div><div>evolution in triggering protests from parents and school administrators.</div><div>One teacher reported being told by school administrators not to teach</div><div>climate change after a parent threatened to come to class and make a scene.</div><div>Online message boards for science teachers tell similar tales. …</div><div>Even so, some are being dragged against their will into a conflict they fear could</div><div>turn ugly. “There seems to be a lynch-mob hate against any teacher trying to</div><div>teach climate change,” says Andrew Milbauer, an environmental sciences</div><div>teacher at Conserve School, a private boarding school in Land O'Lakes,</div><div>Wisconsin. …</div><div>Of course, some attacks on climate change come from well-heeled sources. In</div><div>2009, the Heartland Institute, which has received significant funding from</div><div>Exxon-Mobil, expanded its audience beyond teachers and students with a</div><div>pamphlet, called The Skeptic's Handbook, mailed to the presidents of the</div><div>country's 14,000 public school boards. IRS-4E</div><div>Heartland Institute senior fellow James Taylor, who sent out the pamphlet,</div><div>says the underlying message is that educators need “to understand that</div><div>there is quite a bit that remains to be learned” about climate change. Taylor</div><div>also applauds the actions of the Los Alamitos school board, saying that “if</div><div>the science is unsettled on any topic, of course you should present all points</div><div>of view.”’</div><div>377</div><div>Joseph Bast replied to Science:</div><div>378</div><div>“First, the good news: Ms. Reardon reports that an informal survey of members</div><div>of the National Earth Science Teachers Association found “climate change was</div><div>second only to evolution in triggering protests from parents and school</div><div>
</div><div>376 Sara Reardon, Climate Change Sparks Battles in Classroom, Science 5 August</div><div>2011: Vol. 333 no. 6043 pp. 688-689, DOI: 10.1126/science.333.6043.688.</div><div>www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6043/688.full</div><div>377 This of course, is straight from the creationist “teach the controversy.” Maybe</div><div>Taylor should send them pro-tobacco publications to make sure the kids smoke.</div><div>378 news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2011/08/10/heartland-replies-science</div><div>administrators.” This is great news, since it reveals that parents are rising up</div><div>against the bias and sheer propaganda that often masquerade as science when</div><div>climate is discussed in schools. …</div><div> But how does Ms. Reardon refer to The Heartland Institute? As a 27-year-old</div><div>national nonprofit research and education organization? As a widely</div><div>recognized and respected source of objective analysis on a wide range of topics,</div><div>backed by advisory boards of more than 300 academics and elected officials? Or</div><div>perhaps as a principled advocate of free-market ideas supported by the voluntary</div><div>contributions of some 1,800 donors?</div><div> No, none of this. Ms. Reardon apparently believes the only thing readers need</div><div>to know about Heartland can be expressed in six words: Heartland “has received</div><div>significant funding from Exxon-Mobil.” That’s it. No information about how</div><div>much support we received (never more than 5 percent of our budget), or when</div><div>we received it (not since 2006, three years before the mailing to school board</div><div>presidents took place).</div><div> These facts are readily available on our Web site and we’ve repeated them</div><div>again and again when others have tried to attack our funding sources, rather than</div><div>the veracity of our research. It isn’t good journalism to conceal these facts from</div><div>readers, is it? Shame on Ms. Reardon once more.</div><div> The reason the teaching of climate change is so controversial is because</div><div>environmental advocates, many of them coming from the liberal end of the</div><div>political spectrum, are using the subject to advance their political agendas.</div><div>The goal should be to get politics out of the classroom, not protect it by banning</div><div>debate and censoring objective sources of research.</div><div> Groups such as The Heartland Institute and scientists such as David</div><div>Legates and Willie Soon (who also are mentioned in the article) are</div><div>attempting to return the debate to real science. K-12 teachers who are looking</div><div>for balanced and scientifically rigorous information on climate change can</div><div>find it on one of Heartland’s Web sites, www.heartland.org/issues/environment,</div><div>or at any of the Web sites and blogs listed there.”</div><div>At that point, Sara was not yet familiar with the murky money mazes used</div><div>to fund think tanks. A better statement would have been “Heartland has</div><div>long received money from fossil fuel interests, including companies, trade</div><div>associations and foundations.379”</div><div>Joseph Bast defended Joe Camel, but now seems concerned about</div><div>education. What does the reader think?</div><div>
</div><div>379 Some family foundations were built with fossil profits, some have substantial</div><div>fossil holdings. Some seem to donate for purely ideological reasons.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>77</div><div>N.3 AAAS statement 28 June 2011</div><div>The reader might recall that Heartland’s E&CN is sent to many public</div><div>officials and for a while, was sent for free to all signers of the OISM</div><div>petition, Z2009.08-3.</div><div>Some publications and websites contain incessant attacks on scientists and</div><div>their readers absorb this. The echo-chamber effects stir a small fraction of</div><div>readers to further action beyond that carried out officially by:</div><div>? Reps. Joe Barton (R-TX) and Ed Whitfield (R-KY)380</div><div>? Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) many times</div><div>? VA AG Ken Cuccinelli</div><div>? Chris Horner of ATI/CEI.</div><div>This eventually caused AAAS to comment:381 IRS-3E</div><div>“Statement of the Board of Directors of the American Association for the</div><div>Advancement of Science Regarding Personal Attacks on Climate Scientists</div><div>We are deeply concerned by the extent and nature of personal attacks on</div><div>climate scientists. Reports of harassment, death threats, and legal challenges</div><div>have created a hostile environment that inhibits the free exchange of scientific</div><div>findings and ideas and makes it difficult for factual information and scientific</div><div>analyses to reach policymakers and the public. This both impedes the progress of</div><div>science and interferes with the application of science to the solution of global</div><div>problems. AAAS vigorously opposes attacks on researchers that question their</div><div>personal and professional integrity or threaten their safety based on displeasure</div><div>with their scientific conclusions. The progress of science and protection of its</div><div>integrity depend on both full transparency about the details of scientific</div><div>methodology and the freedom to follow the pursuit of knowledge. The sharing of</div><div>research data is vastly different from unreasonable, excessive Freedom of</div><div>Information Act requests for personal information and voluminous data that are</div><div>then used to harass and intimidate scientists. The latter serve only as a distraction</div><div>and make no constructive contribution to the public discourse.</div><div>Scientists and policymakers may disagree over the scientific conclusions on</div><div>climate change and other policy-relevant topics. But the scientific community</div><div>has proven and well-established methods for resolving disagreements about</div><div>research results. Science advances through a self-correcting system in which</div><div>
</div><div>380 MAS2010, MAS2010a</div><div>381</div><div> www.aaas.org/news/releases/2011/media/0629board_statement.pdf</div><div>research results are shared and critically evaluated by peers and experiments are</div><div>repeated when necessary. Disagreements about the interpretation of data, the</div><div>methodology, and findings are part of daily scientific discourse. Scientists</div><div>should not be subjected to fraud investigations or harassment simply for</div><div>providing scientific results that are controversial. Most scientific disagreements</div><div>are unrelated to any kind of fraud and are considered a legitimate and normal</div><div>part of the scientific process. The scientific community takes seriously its</div><div>responsibility for policing research misconduct, and extensive procedures exist</div><div>to protect the rigor of the scientific method and to ensure the credibility of the</div><div>research enterprise.</div><div>While we fully understand that policymakers must integrate the best available</div><div>scientific data with other factors when developing policies, we think it would be</div><div>unfortunate if policymakers became the arbiters of scientific information and</div><div>circumvented the peer-review process. Moreover, we are concerned that</div><div>establishing a practice of aggressive inquiry into the professional histories of</div><div>scientists whose findings may bear on policy in ways that some find unpalatable</div><div>could well have a chilling effect on the willingness of scientists to conduct</div><div>research that intersects with policy-relevant scientific questions.”</div><div>The reader might consult §W and §Z and evaluate the characterizations of</div><div>most climate scientists mentioned there. Would such anger be encouraged</div><div>in readers of E&CN or not? IRS-3E</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>78</div><div>P. American Institute of Professional Geologists</div><div>This section illustrates Heartland’s ability to disseminate disinformation,</div><div>especially to those who like the message and pass it on. IRS-0E. See</div><div>Z.2010.08-16, where E&CN brought AIPG to the world’s attention.</div><div>The Geological Society of America (GSA) has 24,000 members and the</div><div>American Geophysical Union (AGU) has 50,000+. Both have many</div><div>climate scientists and strong positions on climate change. 382</div><div>The 5,500-member AIPG’s383 tagline is “competence, integrity, ethics,”</div><div>but it is rare in abandoning the straightforward climate position common to</div><div>most relevant science societies384 Some geologists are fine climate</div><div>scientists, but petroleum / mining geologists often are not.</div><div>385</div><div>AIPG Ohio states:</div><div>386</div><div>“The primary goal of the American Institute of Professional Geologists (AIPG)</div><div>Ohio Section is to be the principal advocate for geology and the geologic</div><div>profession in Ohio, and to promote high ethical standards and continuing</div><div>career development for our members.”</div><div>The Ohio October 2010 newsletter included a note by Pres. Justice:</div><div>387</div><div>“This year, we may take special pride that we did not shrink from an issue of</div><div>great national importance, House Bill H.R. 2454 the Markey-Waxman “cap &</div><div>trade” bill. When the bill, now before the Senate, passed through the House on</div><div>June 26, we engaged the entire membership in a timely, democratic vote on</div><div>whether to publicly oppose. When you, our membership, voted by a 77%</div><div>majority to publicly oppose, the Executive Committee responded, approving a</div><div>position statement which reasons strictly on scientific grounds. As a institute</div><div>service to the public, we placed the paper on our website, along with its</div><div>supporting academic and support research references, made available through</div><div>embedded hyperlinks. By so doing, we have given visitors to our website the</div><div>ability to conduct independent research. The Ohio position statement has now</div><div>been mailed to the governor and over twenty legislators. In addition, national</div><div>
</div><div>382 www.geosociety.org/positions/pos10_climate.pdf</div><div>www.agu.org/sci_pol/positions/climate_change2008.shtml</div><div>383</div><div> www.aipg.org</div><div>384 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change</div><div>385 American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) and APS have had</div><div>similar arguments. See MCC2011 or MAS2009 on demographics.</div><div>386 www.aipg-ohio.org</div><div>387 www.aipg-ohio.org/aipgup/pdf/200910Newsletter2.pdf pp.3</div><div>pp.5-6 had excerpts of counterarguments..</div><div>will publish the paper in the upcoming November issue of The Professional</div><div>Geologist.”</div><div>The national AIPG then gave Justice a Presidential Certificate of Merit</div><div>“for his leadership in organization and bring together the Ohio Section to</div><div>contribute relevant professional geologic judgment to national policy</div><div>deliberation.:</div><div>388</div><div>AIPG President John L. Bognar wrote:</div><div>“Yes Professional Geologists, Be Political” p.25:</div><div>“I believe we scientists have a duty to our society to become involved in politics</div><div>when it intersects with our brand of science or profession. Professional</div><div>geologists have an obligation to make political power brokers aware of scientific</div><div>facts. Professional geologists are privileged to possess the responsibility as</div><div>scientists to educate the politicians in the areas of our expertise as to the</div><div>ramifications of their actions.”</div><div>AIPG Executive Director William J. Siok wrote “Civility” p.27:</div><div>“The issue of climate change per se is not as hotly debated as the underlying</div><div>causes. In truth, the entire debate has devolved into a political argument, with</div><div>proponents of anthropogenicity arguing with the skeptics. Political alignments</div><div>are in many cases motivating the point of- view.”</div><div>Andrew “Drew” Diefendorf wrote a well-informed article “Politicization</div><div>of Science From Within the Profession – Career Reflections” in the</div><div>same issue, p.21. He argued that geologists have important roles</div><div>compatible with the results of climate science.389</div><div>In the next issue (JanFeb 2010), Samuel W. Gowan issued a revised</div><div>position statement, in its entirety:390</div><div>“The geological professionals in AIPG recognize that climate change is</div><div>occurring regardless of cause. AIPG supports continued research into all forces</div><div>driving climate change.”</div><div>Ronald Wallace provided a Domestic Energy Statement (p.42), which</div><div>seemed reasonable and more appropriate to AIPG expertise.</div><div>
</div><div>388 64.207.34.58/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2009_TPGNovDec.pdf p.13</div><div>389 I agree … from experience working with geologists in coal, oil and other areas</div><div>of geosciences. AIPG seems to have rejected science in favor of Heartland.</div><div>390 64.207.34.58/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2010_TPGJanFeb.pdf p.42</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>79</div><div>By MarApr 2010391 Executive Director Siok wrote, in “Climate Change</div><div>and Society Governance:”</div><div>“There have been a number of columns, opinion pieces, and letters to the editor</div><div>(about climate change) appearing in the TPG during the previous two years. The</div><div>AIPG Executive Committee established an ad hoc committee to fashion a</div><div>position statement which would adequately represent AIPG membership about</div><div>the topic.</div><div> It seems that AIPG was inadvertently following very closely in the footsteps</div><div>of our sister society, AAPG, which also published columns and letters to the</div><div>editor while simultaneously establishing a Climate Change Committee to write a</div><div>position statement which could be said to represent the association’s</div><div>membership. Unfortunately, there was anthropogenicity to consider.</div><div> The issue of anthropogenicity is contentious enough an issue that it began</div><div>to polarize the AAPG membership. Because so many geologists have an</div><div>unflinching point of view about this issue, the conviction with which these</div><div>points of view are held had (has) the potential to seriously disrupt the</div><div>governance of any otherwise cohesive scientific society. …</div><div> The recent history at AAPG is now being relived at AIPG, albeit on a less</div><div>formal level. Well intentioned members have been arguing about a decision by</div><div>the AIPG Executive to cease the publication of articles and opinion pieces</div><div>concerning climate change in the AIPG news journal The Professional</div><div>Geologist. … AIPG cannot, particularly when the broader scientific</div><div>community cannot, adjudicate the current scientific debate regarding</div><div>climate change and its causes. …</div><div> The question of anthropogenicity of climate change is contentious.”</div><div>In MayJun 2011392 we find Bob W. Gaddis, of Tulsa OK, a candidate393 for</div><div>AIPG National Treasurer:</div><div>“ As mentioned earlier, our economy is in a slowdown and is being tested with</div><div>high-debt political policies. When bad science is used politically, especially in a</div><div>major way, we cannot turn our heads. I believe that, as professionals, we have</div><div>an ethical obligation to voice our opinion on matters that fall under our</div><div>expertise, 394 especially when harm is possible. Geologists, as “earth</div><div>scientists”, must be a primary source for the research of our climate.395 I</div><div>
</div><div>391 64.207.34.58/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2010_TPGMarApr.pdf p.33</div><div>392 64.207.34.58/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2010_TPGMayJun.pdf p.18</div><div>393 He indeed became Treasurer for 2011-2012.</div><div>394 OH-AIPG’s “expertise” in climate seems derived from Heartland.</div><div>395 Geology overlaps with climate science, but for geologists to claim they should</div><div>be the primary source for climate research is ludicrous, as will be seen next page.</div><div>commend our Ohio Section with their discussion of the Markey- Waxman bill</div><div>and the handling of their vote. This bill is based on faulty science and is strictly</div><div>a wealth-redistribution process. Likewise, AIPG has to be available for</div><div>discussions, for the airing of different professional opinions. As earth scientists,</div><div>we remain stewards of the Earth.”</div><div>One could straightforwardly oppose that bill for various legitimate reasons,</div><div>sometimes from opposite directions.396</div><div> OH-AIPG did not do that, but</div><div>claimed it was strictly science. Their position statement is a recitation of</div><div>standard anti-science memes seen and refuted many times.</div><div>In just one of many examples:</div><div>“We note an inability of ground-based data to agree with superior quality</div><div>temperature values from weather balloons and satellites.”</div><div>The authors were reading Heartland’s E&CN, not Science, §Y.1.</div><div>Their position statement is an instructive example of Heartland’s skill in</div><div>propagating misinformation. Most of the references derive from</div><div>Heartland, Singer, Roy Spencer and OISM, mixed with a few notobviously-relevant</div><div>geology texts. A few good sources are cited, but</div><div>wrongly. An important one is actually a false citation that shows the</div><div>authors had done little serious research.</div><div>I sympathize with the AIPG’s sensible people who either know climate</div><div>science or defer to those who do at AGU or GSA. Some AIPG members</div><div>have apparently been worried that AIPG was “aging out and there might</div><div>be a reason for that.397</div><div>The entire OH-AIPG statement is presented on the next few pages, tagged</div><div>with a few of the relevant Memes from Skeptical Science.398</div><div>OH-AIPG and AIPG in general have now bet their reputations as</div><div>scientists and claims to “competence, integrity, ethics” on this.</div><div>
</div><div>396 People may straightforwardly object to increased costs. Obviously petroleum</div><div>and especially coal mining exploration people have specific reasons to dislike</div><div>actions that might reduce their business. Others might strongly prefer a simpler,</div><div>easier-to-manage carbon tax that was harder to game and vote against the bill in</div><div>the hope of getting something better. Others might dislike cap-and-trade, but vote</div><div>for it anyway, thinking a carbon tax politically impossible.</div><div>397 MAS2009. Generally, rejection of AGW tends to be more likely among older</div><div>members of some societies and less likely among younger ones.</div><div>398 www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>80</div><div>‘Ohio Section of American Institute of Professional Geologists Position</div><div>Statement Markey-Waxman “Cap & Trade” House Bill H.R. 2454399</div><div>The Ohio Section of the American Institute of Professional Geologists does</div><div>hereby oppose House Bill H.R. 2454, the Markey-Waxman “cap & trade” bill.</div><div>The bill is based on the premise that human production of CO2 gas is</div><div>responsible for “global warming” and that “global warming poses a significant</div><div>threat to the national security, economy, public health and welfare, and</div><div>environment of the United States and other countries” (H.R. 2454, Title VII,</div><div>Part A, Section 701). The Ohio Section of AIPG professes that there is no</div><div>scientific evidence supporting this premise. Meme-36 We therefore reject the</div><div>bill’s aforementioned, unsupported premise. Subsequently, we also reject the</div><div>bill’s alarmist claims and unprecedented, economy-wide, government-control</div><div>proposals.</div><div> As geologists, we affirm that any evaluation of climatic change should be</div><div>viewed through the context of geologic time and processes. We recognize that</div><div>world climate has and will change. We concur with the U.S. Geological Survey</div><div>position that, “the earth’s surface does not exist in a static, unchanging ‘natural’</div><div>condition interrupted only by the work of humans, but instead is a dynamic</div><div>system of which humans are a part.”1 Indeed, the earth’s 4.5 billion year history</div><div>contains evidence of thousands of climatic variations pre-dating the dawn of</div><div>humanity to present time. Rock records contain evidence of numerous</div><div>transgressions (advances), and regressions (retreats) of sea-level. The greater</div><div>part of Ohio and the northern latitudes were buried by four major continental</div><div>glacial ice advances within the past one million years, with the most recent iceretreat</div><div>occurring approximately 10,000 years ago.2 More recently, temperatures</div><div>were warmer than present during the Medieval Warm Period (550 A.D. to 1150</div><div>A.D.), Meme-56 and cooler than present during the Little Ice Age (1500 A.D. to</div><div>late 1800s A.D).3 Past geologic history and physical evidence from the most</div><div>recent ice-ages indicate that the northern latitudes are now experiencing a</div><div>warming cycle. Meme-136 Therefore, observed ice-melting is to be expected.</div><div>Dominant natural causes for climate change are several and include but are not</div><div>limited to solar variation in multi-spectral radiation; solar wind cycles;</div><div>magnetic-pole reversals; wind circulation cycles; oceanic current cycles;</div><div>greenhouse-gas fluctuations associated with volcanism and other natural causes;</div><div>oceanic-atmospheric gas exchange cycles; plate tectonics; astronomical cycles;</div><div>earth rotational cycles; and other natural influences discovered and</div><div>undiscovered. We are concerned that the bill relies primarily on reports by the</div><div>United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC), to</div><div>support its premise. Our concerns include IPCC reliance on unrepresentative</div><div>ground-based temperature stations.4 We note an inability of ground-based data</div><div>
</div><div>399 64.207.34.58/StaticContent/3/TPGs/2009_TPGNovDec.pdf p.14-16.</div><div>to agree with superior quality temperature values from weather- balloons and</div><div>satellites.5 Meme-38 Of additional concern is the 2001 IPCC Third</div><div>Assessment Report’s heavy reliance on the work of Mann et al. (1998)6 to</div><div>support the claim that 1998 was the “warmest year, in at least a millennium.”</div><div>The claim, along with its prominently featured “hockey stick” temperature</div><div>graph has since been discredited by the National Academy of Science (2006).7</div><div>Meme-18 We also take concern with IPCC dependence on unreliable climate</div><div>computer-model simulations. Meme-05 A high degree of model uncertainty was</div><div>made clear during a recent failure to predict a current cooling trend revealed by</div><div>NASA satellite data (2008).8 Meme-04 Dr. Roy Spencer, former Senior</div><div>Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center,</div><div>contends that an incomplete understanding of clouds, and water vapor in its role</div><div>as the dominant green-house gas, are prime sources of model error.9 Meme-186</div><div>The bill’s authors are apparently aware of model limitations, since the bill</div><div>contains no temperature reduction goals, contrary to its stated climate control</div><div>objectives.</div><div> Given the lack of evidence supporting the bill’s premise, Meme-36 we reject</div><div>the claims of near-term increases in human-caused severe weather, fire, coastal</div><div>flooding, drought, disease, mass animal extinctions, and displaced human</div><div>populations (H.R. 2454, Title VII, Part A, Section 701). As geologists, we</div><div>advocate careful conservation of the earth’s resources, sound stewardship, and</div><div>protection of the environment. The United States has become a leader in</div><div>developing effective strategies to achieve these objectives. However, these</div><div>objectives are not paralleled in emerging markets. We therefore oppose the bill</div><div>because it will increase global pollution, by shifting American manufacturing to</div><div>emerging countries such as China, India, and others. We also recognize grave</div><div>economic consequences from the bill, which extend beyond the scope of this</div><div>geologic advisory position paper.</div><div> There is compelling evidence to support the position that human CO2</div><div>emissions do not cause climate-change. Existing data reveal that human changeagents</div><div>are so small in the total climate force-field that they are negligible.</div><div>Meme-69 We therefore advocate thoughtful evaluation based on the scientific</div><div>method and oppose any hasty and drastic action. We, the Ohio Section of the</div><div>American Institute of Professional Geologists, find we are in the company of</div><div>some 30,000 scientists world-wide who objectively subscribe to this same</div><div>position.10 Meme-94 Approved by</div><div>The executive committee on this date, August 27, 2009.</div><div>J. Matthew Justice, …, President, Ohio Section of</div><div>American Institute of Professional Geologists’</div><div>Co-authors designate J. Matthew Justice, …, President,</div><div>Ohio Section</div><div>William E. Shafer, …, 1974 Past-President, Ohio Section</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>81</div><div>Works Cited</div><div>“1. U.S Geological Survey. June 22, 2009. Climate Change Science, Earth</div><div>Surface Dynamics. geochange.er.usgs.gov</div><div>2. Schuschert, C., and C. Dunbar. 1947. Text Book of Geology, Part One, Fourth</div><div>Edition. p.433.</div><div>3. Monroe, S., R. Wicander. 1997. The Changing Earth, Exploring Geology and</div><div>Evolution, Second Edition. p. 335.</div><div>4. Watts, A. 2009. Is the U.S. Surface Temperature Record Reliable? The</div><div>Heartland Institute. www.heartland.org/books/SurfaceStations.html</div><div>5. Michaels, P. J., S. Singer, and D. Douglas. October 1, 2004. Global Warming</div><div>Computer Models Seriously Flawed, Studies Show. Environment and Climate</div><div>News. The Heartland Institute. news.heartland.org/newspaperarticle/2004/10/01/global-warming-computer-models-seriously-flawed-studiesshow</div><div>6. Mann, M., R. Bradley, and M. Hughes. 1998. Global Scale Temperature</div><div>Patterns and Climate Forcing Over the Past Six Centuries: Nature, v. 392. p.</div><div>779-787.</div><div>7. National Research Council, U.S. National Academy of Science. July 19, 2006.</div><div>Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years, Statement of</div><div>Gerald R. North, Ph.D., National Academy of Sciences before the Subcommittee</div><div>on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce U.S.</div><div>House of Representatives.</div><div>8. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. January 13, 2009. GISS</div><div>Surface Temperature Analysis: data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008</div><div>9. Spencer, R.W. December 29, 2008. Global Warming, Natural or Manmade?</div><div> www.drroyspencer.com/global-warming-natural-or-manmade</div><div>10. Petition Project. Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine.</div><div>www.petitionproject.org</div><div>References</div><div>1. Access to Energy. www.accesstoenergy.com</div><div>2. Bast, J. 2008. Ten Principles of Energy Policy, Legislative Principles Series</div><div>Number 4. The Heartland Institute.</div><div>www.heartland.org/custom/semod_policybot/pdf/23730.pdf .</div><div>3. Burnett, S. October 1, 2006. Congressional Hearings Break ‘Hockey Stick.’</div><div>Environment and Climate News. Heartland Institute.</div><div>www.heartland.org/policybot/results/19734/Congressional_Hearings_Break_Ho</div><div>ckey_Stick.html .</div><div>4. Goldthwait, R.P, M.B Lafferty. 1979. Ohio’s Natural Heritage. Ohio</div><div>Academy of Science. p. 33-47.</div><div>5. Gray, W. March 8 – 10, 2009. Climate Change: Driven by the Ocean, Not</div><div>Human Activity. Second Annual Heartland Institute Sponsored Conference on</div><div>Climate Change.</div><div>www.heartland.org/policybot/results/24891/Climate_Change_Driven_by_the_O</div><div>cean_not_Human_Activity.html .</div><div>6. Heartland Institute. Global Warming Facts.</div><div>www.globalwarmingheartland.org.</div><div>7. Junkscience.com. August 2007. The Real ‘Inconvenient Truth’: Some Facts</div><div>About Greenhouse Gas www. junkscience.com/Greenhouse</div><div>8. The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change; and Signatories to the</div><div>Leipzig Declaration . www.sepp. org/policy%20declarations/leipzig.html .9.</div><div>Merrifield, B. July 11, 2007. Global Warming and Solar Radiation. American</div><div>Thinker.www.heartland.org/policybot/results/21765/Global_Warming_and_Sola</div><div>r_Radiation.html .</div><div>10. The Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine. Global Warming Petition</div><div>Project. www.oism.org/s32p31.htm .</div><div>11. Risdon, P. July 2008. Scores of Peer Reviewed Studies Contradict Global</div><div>Warming Alarmism. Environment and Climate News. Heartland Institute.</div><div>www.heartland.org/policybot/results/23406/Scores_of_PeerReviewed_Studies</div><div>Contradict_Global_Warming_Alarmism.html .</div><div>12. Robinson, A., N. Robinson, and W. Soon. Environmental Effects of</div><div>Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Petition Project.</div><div>www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm#Message5974 .</div><div>13. Science and Environmental Policy Project. www.sepp.org/ .</div><div>14. Singer, S. July 1999. The Scientific Case Against the Global Climate Treaty.</div><div>The Science and Environmental Policy Project. www.sepp.org.</div><div>15. Singer, S., and C. Idso. 2009. Climate Change Reconsidered:</div><div>The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate</div><div>Change. www.nipccreport.org/ aboutReport.html.</div><div>Note: Numerous support and academic citations are accessible through the above</div><div>stated references.’</div><div>This is embarrassingly poor scholarship, just on citations and references</div><div>alone. Is the concept of credible peer-reviewed science foreign to AIPG?</div><div>8 Heartland: Cites: 4, 5. Refs: 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 15.</div><div>3 OISM: Cites: 10. Refs:1 (Access to Energy ~OISM), 10, 12.</div><div>3 Singer: Refs: 8, 13, 14.</div><div>1 Steve Milloy (junkscience): Refs: 1</div><div>1 Roy Spencer’s blog: Cites: 9 Thus, non-peer-reviewed sources: 16/25</div><div>4 Generally seem irrelevant: Cites: 1, 2, 3. Refs: 4.</div><div>2 MBH98 and NRC Cites: 6,7. The IPCC used MBH99, which covered</div><div>1,000 years, not the 600 of the earlier MBH98. This is a false citation,</div><div>hinting that OH-AIPG never read these, just used secondhand opinions,</div><div>likely via Heartland. Likewise, NRC “discredited” is wrong/misleading. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>82</div><div>W. Environment and Climate News analysis</div><div>W.1 Overview</div><div>Introduction</div><div>Heartland’s 86 PDF issues of E&CN from June 2001 through January</div><div>2012400 were skimmed and excerpted, sometimes with annotations.. All 86</div><div>issues (1723) pages were combined as one large PDF for simple statisticsgathering,</div><div>§W.3. §Z contains about 110 pages of material, including most</div><div>articles or advertisements on climate or tobacco, and sometimes energy,</div><div>pollution and occasional other topics These are shown to give readers a</div><div>feel for E&CN,</div><div>401 especially with regard to charity education rules, IRS-0E.</div><div>Every issue is linked, and the reader is encouraged to sample a few</div><div>originals. One good example is Z.2008.07.</div><div>Entries here are uniquely labeled for ease of cross-reference and search:</div><div>Z.yyyy.mm-nn Year, month, page number (plus “a,b,..” if needed)</div><div>yyyy.mm-nn no entry here, but can be found in E&CN issue</div><div>Heartland’s E&CN displays the actions of Heartland, Singer and others</div><div>who write for it.</div><div>Analysis Summary of 11 years of E&CN</div><div>Heartland is a tax-free Bast-family media and lobbying business.</div><div>E&CN has consistently implemented a “treetops-grassroots” political</div><div>advocacy strategy attractive to its funders: conservative family foundations</div><div>who provide most of Heartland’s money, plus industrials that tend to</div><div>privatize the profits and socialize the losses or risks, including tobacco and</div><div>fossil-interests and some others. Roy Marden of Philip Morris has been on</div><div>Heartland’s Board 1996-2008. Smoking-supportive articles and</div><div>advertisements appeared as late as 2008, plus Singer’s Z.2011.02-17.</div><div>As shown in §W.2, E&CN’s primary audience is state and local elected</div><div>officials, whose coverage Bast has touted as competitive advantage over</div><div>Washington, DC think tanks. All this is sold to advertisers, and more</div><div>importantly, donors, as influence with elected officials:</div><div>
</div><div>400 heartland.org/issue-archive/environment-and-climate-news A few PDFs failed.</div><div>401 For brevity, most articles had to be ignored. Anyone can express opinions, but</div><div>in some domains, non-expert opinion is irrelevant at best. Rejecting mainstream</div><div>climate science is no different from rejecting of medical research relating smoking</div><div>and disease. Real scientists publish regularly in Science or Nature, not E&CN.</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News and 22% say it has</div><div>influenced their opinion or led to a change in public policy!”</div><div>Actually, Heartland’s recent “”About” page is stronger:</div><div>402</div><div>Survey Results: … 79% of state legislators and 63% of local elected officials</div><div>read at least one of our publications. 45% of state legislators say a Heartland</div><div>publication changed their mind or led to a change in public policy. IRS-5L</div><div>Otherwise, E&CN tries to appeal to conservative/Libertarian/Tea Party</div><div>citizens. Its claims to be nonpartisan make a mockery of the word, given</div><div>the balance of articles, advertisements and legislative advisors. It urges</div><div>people to contact legislators based on E&CN articles. In recent years, it</div><div>has stirred parents to object to teaching of mainstream climate science in</div><div>classrooms, with tactics similar to creationism/evolution battles.</div><div>Basics of mainstream climate science are as unarguable as those of medical</div><div>science regarding tobacco and some other environmental harms.</div><div>E&CN pervasively promotes factually erroneous ideas about science and</div><div>thus seriously violates the public charity rules. IRS-0E</div><div>The reader can peruse §Z for the numerous cases, but several stand out:</div><div>? E&CN ran graphs in 85 of 86 issues, leading readers to believe that</div><div>there was no global warming trend and attacking mainstream science.</div><div>§Y.1 explains why that was a deliberate untruth, repeated often in</div><div>various articles by Singer and others. IRS-2, IRS-4E</div><div>? From 2005 through early 2009, articles extolled Michael Crichton as</div><div>an expert on climate (he was not) in 8 issues, and in 20 issues featured</div><div>half-page “Crichton is Right!” advertisements. This was relentlesslypromoted</div><div>untruth designed to appeal to officials and the public. See</div><div>§Y.2.. IRS-2E, IRS-3E, IRS-4E.</div><div>? The terms “alarmist” or “alarmism” are used ~10 times/issue, IRS-3E</div><div>? The idea of influencing legislators appears often, IRS-5L</div><div>? Policies, shape of government, value of any particular energy project</div><div>or environmental rule are legitimately arguable, but charities are</div><div>supposed to show some balance. E&CN could be summarized: IRS-0E</div><div>Environmental regulation, renewable energy: NEVER</div><div>Fossil fuels: FOREVER (and mercury and cigarettes are OK)</div><div>
</div><div>402 heartland.org/about 01/03/12.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>83</div><div>W.2 Readership primarily elected officials</div><div>This can be calibrated via circulation reports and advertisements.</div><div>? Heartland sent E&CN free to elected officials, who have comprised the</div><div>bulk of the readership in recent years.</div><div>? Heartland often tagged the front page with:</div><div>“57% of legislators read Environment and Climate News.”</div><div>? Heartland sought advertisers by touting access to this audience.</div><div>? Heartland sent free copies for a while to OISM petition signers.</div><div>? Some copies were sent classroom distribution.</div><div>Z.2001.10-20 and earlier at 2001.06-19</div><div>“It was not, I regret to say, enough to keep us from reducing the circulation of</div><div>this issue from the previous level of 45,000 copies to about 30,000. Every state</div><div>and national elected official in the U.S., environment reporters at major</div><div>newspapers, and people who have filled out subscription cards remain on the</div><div>complimentary mailing list.”</div><div>Z.2002.03-15, March 2002. Also April, May, July, August, September,</div><div>October, November 2002, then January, February 2003.</div><div>“Your story could encourage an advertiser to join our effort, or a grant-maker to</div><div>help finance our growing circulation.”</div><div>Z.2005.06-19 Welcome, New Readers!</div><div>James M Taylor wrote:</div><div>“you are probably one of the 8,500 mayors, city council members, village</div><div>presidents, and county officials added to the complimentary mailing list…</div><div>Environment & Climate News is a monthly publication providing the latest news</div><div>on environmental science and public policy issues.</div><div>What makes Environment & Climate News unique is the publication’s focus</div><div>on state and local governments.”</div><div>Z.2005.06-19a Circulation Report</div><div>“8,500 state & national elected officials</div><div>8,440 municipal officials</div><div>3,660 donors, allies, friends, subscribers</div><div>900 classroom distribution</div><div>21,900 print total</div><div>968 electronic”</div><div>Z.2006.04-4, 05-18, 06-18, 07-18, 10-17; 2007.09-7 Circulation Report</div><div>“8,636 state & national elected officials</div><div>8,440 municipal officials</div><div>3,600 conference distribution</div><div>1,287 subscribers</div><div>988 environment reporters</div><div>900 classroom distribution</div><div>869 allies</div><div>795 donors</div><div>378 advisors and VIPs</div><div>25,893 print total</div><div>968 electronic” This means:</div><div>66% (17,076) sent free to officials</div><div>5% paid subscribers</div><div>Z.2006.11-17 Heartland Circulation Report</div><div>“47,904 environment professionals (new category)</div><div>8,506 state & national elected officials</div><div>8,262 trial subscriptions (new category)</div><div>8,143 local elected officials</div><div>1,384 subscribers</div><div>1,196 bulk and conference distribution</div><div>979 media</div><div>975 friends and allies</div><div>795 donors</div><div>901 donors and members</div><div>78,250 print total</div><div>E&CN seems to send many free copies. By 2009.08, they were back down</div><div>to 44,000, sent out 31,000 to reach 75,000 again.</div><div>Z.2009.08-3 Welcome, New Readers!</div><div>“If this is one of your first issues of Environment & Climate News, you are</div><div>probably one of the 31,000 scientists participating in the Petition Project, … Our</div><div>total circulation now stands at approximately 75,000.”</div><div>Z.2011.02-6 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>“This could be your last issue of Environment & Climate News!”</div><div>The print edition is no longer free, except for elected officials.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>84</div><div>W.3 Words and viewpoints</div><div>Following are rough-estimate counts done by Adobe Acrobat Full Reader</div><div>Search403 on 1,723 pages to get a general idea of E&CN’s views.</div><div>404 Some</div><div>require combinations of searches to remove irrelevancies. These are rough</div><div>assessments of the views in E&CN, but are quite consistent.</div><div>Heartland usually negative or very negative</div><div>2,160 EPA (except OK during Bush administration when fending off CA)</div><div>1,476 activis (-t or –m, as in environmental, anti-smoking; some are OK)</div><div>1,474 California</div><div>880 alarm: 556 alarmist, 94 alarmisn, 51 alarming405 IRS-3E 10</div><div>761 renewable</div><div>719 environmentalist (except “free-market” or “common-sense” ones)</div><div>599 ethanol406</div><div>470 IPCC</div><div>352 Gore (Al) also appears in cartoons, such as Z.2006.07-14.</div><div>333 wind farm407</div><div>277 wind power</div><div>216 myth (as in global warming real, or radiation bad, or solar/wind useful)</div><div>209 CAFÉ (standards, or generally, anything that improves fuel economy)</div><div>209 solar power</div><div>
</div><div>403 No attempt was made to check every instance of those with larger hit counts.</div><div>Readers should consider numbers as approximate hints.</div><div>404 I might even agree with a few, but for E&CN’s pervasive attempts to conflate</div><div>people who would like clean air and water with the tiny number of real extremists.</div><div>405 I allege that the pervasive use of “alarmists” to label mainstream science,</div><div>scientists and anyone who agrees, strongly violates public charity rules. This is</div><div>hardly the only pejorative used in lieu of reasoned argument, IRS-3E.</div><div>406 Originally, changes in farm price supports ? oversupply of corn ? wish for</div><div>expanded markets ? Midwest political power ? ethanol subsidies, little to do</div><div>with environmentalists, who have often had mixed or negative views of it. See:</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_policy_of_the_United_States</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy</div><div>Those who run large, mechanized farms like the idea of being able to grow crops</div><div>whose prices might track varying or increasing fuel costs. Sugarcane-based</div><div>ethanol seems to be useful, corn-based ethanol seems marginal, but the reader</div><div>should look first to agricultural policies, rather than “environmentalists.”</div><div>407 Wind turbines (or solar) may or may not be a good idea in any particular place,</div><div>and people may invest in them partly to help scale up manufacturing and reduce</div><div>costs. E&CN persistently denigrated them everywhere.</div><div>201 lobby (anti-smoker, anti-technology, anti-market, environmentalist.)</div><div> If fossil or tobacco lobbies exist, E&CN does not mention those.</div><div>199 Obama (Barack)</div><div>188 wind turbine</div><div>174 Greenpeace</div><div>135 junk science (conflation of poor science with mainstream), IRS-3E</div><div>124 extremis (-ists, m, as in environmental)408</div><div>117 McCain (John, as in McCain-Lieberman bill)</div><div>104 Schwarzenegger (usually)</div><div>103 Hansen (James, of NASA GISS)</div><div>101 fraud (and –ulent, as in scientific, solar, fraudulent data) IRS-3E</div><div>100 World Wildlife Fund, WWF</div><div>99 so-called (as in greenhouse gases, renewable sources, etc)</div><div>94 propaganda (as in alarmist, green, anti-pollution)</div><div>94 solar energy</div><div>63 eco-imperialism</div><div>59 sustainability</div><div>57 eco-terror: 31 ecoterrorist (conflated with environmentalism)</div><div>70 inconvenient (as in An Inconvenient Truth, by Al Gore)</div><div>69 hockey (as in hockey stick temperature graph)</div><div>59 mongers (as in scaremongers, fear-mongers) IRS-3E</div><div>47 solar panel</div><div>44 corrupt (and –ion, as of science in thinking AGW real) IRS-3E</div><div>42 GISS (NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies)</div><div>35 Waxman (Henry, D-CA)</div><div>35 Markey (Edward, D-MA)</div><div>25 indoctrinate, indoctrination (as in An Inconvenient Truth)</div><div>22 Rachel Carson409</div><div>22 nonsmoker or non-smoker</div><div>19 NCAR (flawed, institutionally committed to alarmism)</div><div>18 CFL (bad, since deemed major source of mercury)</div><div>11 carbon cartel</div><div>10 Michael Mann</div><div>7 crony, cronyism (as in IPCC or crony capitalism for renewables)</div><div>5 anti-smoker lobby</div><div>4 warmist (not so common, apparently Heartland message is “alarmist”)</div><div>
</div><div>408 “Environmental extremists” certainly exist, but E&CN applies the label widely.</div><div>409 “Were I a more religious person, I would be inclined to believe she made a pact</div><div>with the devil in which she received the capacity to write beautiful prose poetry in</div><div>exchange for leading society down a path to Hell paved with the proverbial “good</div><div>intentions.” – Jay Lehr, 2007.06-17. IRS-3E</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>85</div><div>Positive (or acceptable as ~zero risk) including public figures</div><div>1,444 Nuclear (power) very positive, no risks</div><div>1,070 Bush (George, mostly good, except when did not go far enough)</div><div>941 mercury (mostly OK in fish/ elsewhere, except CFLs, geothermal))</div><div>935 coal – very positive</div><div>830 chemical (any concerns are overblown)</div><div>266 radiation – not ever really a problem</div><div>627 satellite (as in UAH satellite results showing no warming), §Y.1</div><div>560 experts (mostly positive, as in “experts say,” “experts agree”)</div><div>528 ozone (OK at ground level)</div><div>436 DDT (No problems.)</div><div>412 drill (as for oil)</div><div>369 pesticide</div><div>318 asbestos (no problem, except asbestos litigation is bad)</div><div>281 analyst (-s) of which 113 are “analysts” as in “all analysts agree,” etc.</div><div>236 Crichton (Michael) - of which 41 are “Crichton is right”</div><div>234 herbicide</div><div>175 drought (generally not a problem, nothing to do with AGW)</div><div>140 sound science (as practiced by Heartland, Milloy, Singer, etc.)</div><div>410</div><div>136 smog (what’s bad are costly smog standards)</div><div>140 grassroots (as in become grassroots activist for sound science…)</div><div>133 arsenic (generally OK, since mostly natural)</div><div>130 plastic</div><div>128 UAH (University of Alabama at Huntsville, satellites) §Y.1</div><div>110 Inhofe (James, Senator, R-OK)</div><div>110 market environment (-alist, -alism, usually free-market environmental)</div><div>106 dioxin</div><div>103 common-sense environment (-alist or –alism)</div><div>69 frack</div><div>67 smoker (having deleted 20 nonsmoker)</div><div>55 realist, realism (as in climate realists, not alarmists)</div><div>44 secondhand (smoke) (OK, no threat)</div><div>40 NIPCC</div><div>28 acid rain</div><div>
</div><div>410 “Sound science” was invented by Philip Morris, APCO and TASSC (Milloy,</div><div>Cohen, advice from Singer).</div><div>Elisa K. Ong, MD, MS, and Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, ‘Constructing “Sound</div><div>Science” and “Good Epidemiology”: Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations</div><div>Firms’ ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1749</div><div>See also MOO2005 (many). E&CN authors “stay on message” although Singer</div><div>once wrote “solid science” and then fixed it in a later version.</div><div>Names/affiliations writing for E&CN or are quoted positively, §ES-1</div><div>1,170 James M. Taylor or James Taylor, Heartland</div><div>784 Lehr (Jay), Heartland</div><div>445 Bast (Joseph or Diane), Heartland</div><div>335 Burnett (Sterling), NCPA, 24 “Burnett, PhD.”</div><div>314 Singer (S. Fred) (removed singers and Schlesinger), SEPP</div><div>292 Competitive Enterprise Institute (plus many more CEI)</div><div>285 CATO (Institute)</div><div>236 Crichton (Michael)</div><div>205 Michaels (Pat or Patrick) CATO</div><div>202 Bonner (R. Cohen) NCPPR, was TASSC with Milloy 2001-2005</div><div>193 Hoare (James)</div><div>181 National Center for Policy Analysis, including 38 NCPA</div><div>155 Tanton (Thomas)</div><div>146 Milloy (Steve), junkscience.com, TASSC (PM-funded)</div><div>142 Avery (Dennis or Alex or both)</div><div>132 Chumley (Cheryl K.)</div><div>131 Driessen (Paul K.) CFACT</div><div>121 Science and Environmental Policy Project or SEPP</div><div>108 Ebell (Myron) CEI</div><div>99 American Enterprise Institute, AEI</div><div>99 National Center for Public Policy Research, NCPPR</div><div>94 Carducci (Alyssa)</div><div>86 Idso (Craig, Sherwood or Keith), CSCDGC, CO2science, SPPI</div><div>86 Murray (Iain) CEI</div><div>84 (Willie) Soon</div><div>74 Horner (Chris), CEI and ATI</div><div>72 Fraser Institute (Canada)</div><div>69 American Legislative Exchange Council, ALEC</div><div>62 Ferguson (Robert), FF/CSPP, SPPI (really CSCDGC)</div><div>58 junkscience (Steve Milloy’s website)</div><div>49 Marlo (Lewis), CEI</div><div>45 (George) Marshall Institute i.e., GMI here.</div><div>44 Heritage Foundation</div><div>36 Monckton (Viscount Christopher)</div><div>35 Whelan (Elizabeth, Pres. of ACSH)</div><div>30 Ridenour (David or Amy) NCPPR</div><div>29 Science and Public Policy Institute, SPPI</div><div>28 O’Keefe (William), GMI</div><div>27 Reason Foundation</div><div>Other terms found often</div><div>290 freedom; 85 liberty</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>86</div><div>W.4 Articles, advertisements chronology</div><div>Fig. W.4.1 chronicles some articles, repeated advertisements and the</div><div>satellite analysis found in almost every issue, §Y.1.</div><div>Entries either show the number of articles in an issue or the size (quarter,</div><div>third, half, full-page. H in Heartland column indicates Heartland’s own</div><div>content. Articles are underlined and the satellite features italicized.</div><div>e: education, stirring parents to complain about use of AIT in schools, or</div><div>earlier, encouraging them to share E&CN articles with their children.</div><div>Some of these promote grassroots-treetops political strategy:</div><div>t: Treetops, appealing to elected officials, including free trips and dinners</div><div>g: Grassroots, exhorting people to join or write to elected officials</div><div>a: Seeking advertisers, usually touting ability to reach elected officials.</div><div>Crichton was well-advertised.</div><div>Fig. W.4.1 Common E&CN content</div><div>Articles , Advertisements, Features Heartland 2001.06 2001.08 2001.09 2001.10 2001.12 2002.01 2002.02 2002.03 2002.04 2002.05 2002.07 2002.08 2002.09 2002.10 2002.11 2003.01 2003.02 2003.03 2003.05 2003.07 2003.08 2003.09 2003.10 2003.12 2004.01 2004.02 2004.03 2004.05 2004.06 2004.07 2004.08 2004.09 2004.10 2005.01 2005.02 2005.04 2005.05 2005.06 2005.07 2005.08 2005.10 2005.11 2005.12 ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### 2007.02 2007.03 2007.04 2007.05 2007.06 2007.07 2007.09 2007.10 2007.11 2007.12 2008.01 2008.02 2008.03 2008.04 2008.05 2008.07 2008.08 2008.09 2009.01 2009.08 2009.10 2010.08 2010.09 2010.10 2010.11 2011.01 2011.02 2011.03 2011.04 2011.09 2011.10 2011.11 2012.01</div><div>Article: Smoking-supportive H 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1</div><div>Smoker's Lounge / Do you? H q q q q q q q q</div><div>Is this global warming? H t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t</div><div>EarthTrack H t h h h h h h h h h h h</div><div>Still no sign of global warming H h h h h h h h h h h h h</div><div>Is this global warming? H h h h h h h h h h h</div><div>How much global warming? H f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f</div><div>Article about Crichton H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1</div><div> Crichton is RIGHT! H h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h</div><div> Outstanding spkr? Jay Lehr H q t h h h h t h q h h q q h h h h h h q h h h h h h h h h q q q q q q h</div><div>Taylor: no cause for alarm H h h h h h h h h h h</div><div>GW Fact, Myth or Scare Tactic? H f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f q h f q</div><div>Ad for ICCC t H h h h f f f h f f f f f f f</div><div>Ad for NIPCC H q q q q q</div><div>SEPP (Singer) h h h h</div><div>Hot Talk, Cold Science (Singer) H q q q q q q q q q q q q</div><div>Unstoppable GW, 1500 yrs q q q q q q</div><div>Where do elected officials..? a H f f f</div><div>Want to reach elected off...? a H f f f f f f f</div><div>Want more customers? Or ~ a H f f f f f f f f f 1 f</div><div>Climate Search/PolicyBot t H f q h t q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q q</div><div>Emerging Issues Forum t H h h f h h h H h h</div><div>Are you elected official? t H h h h h h h h</div><div>E&CN is Tool g H q t t t t t t t t</div><div>Get active g H f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f</div><div>We do much more g H q q</div><div>Tell Your Congressman g H f f</div><div>Education articles/ad e H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 3</div><div>Is child being indoctrinated? e H q q q q q q q</div><div>Ad for Sovereignty DVD e q q q q q q q q q</div><div>Isn't it time you joined ? H f f f f f f F F F F F F f F f f</div><div>Challenge debate X vs Gore H h h h h</div><div>Al Gore is bad for the planet q q f</div><div>Junk Science Judo, Steve Milloy q q h q q</div><div>Why the NAM? h h h h</div><div>Marshall Institute h h h q q q q</div><div>Let's look at the science, Bast H f q q q q q</div><div>A picture is worth … H h h h h</div><div>Global warming sham shirts h h h h</div><div>Ad for Power Grab q q q q q q q</div><div>Welcome to the pub H f</div><div>2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2,006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011</div><div>Smoking</div><div>Satellites §Y.1 - 85 of 86 issues</div><div>Heartland for itself</div><div>or against climate science</div><div>Crichton §Y.2 - 25 issues</div><div>Singer 7 more issues with ads +47 Aq = 54 issues</div><div>Political</div><div>advocacy</div><div>Parents</div><div>Misc</div><div>An Inconvenient Truth Nobel </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>87</div><div>X. E&CN Authors and some quotees</div><div>X.1 Key contributors - overview</div><div>Many E&CN articles excerpted in §Z were written by a small set of</div><div>authors. Fig. X.1.1 on next page shows the chronology of E&CN people..</div><div>A relevant subset of Contributors (“Editors” or later “Authors”) was</div><div>extracted from each issue’s masthead and the issue was searched for</div><div>articles:411</div><div>Joseph and Diane Carol Bast wrote occasional articles. Science Director</div><div>Jay Lehr wrote many. Managing Editor James M. Taylor wrote</div><div>prolifically. Pat Michaels and Fred Singer were the other two involved</div><div>through almost the entire time. Sterling Burnett wrote more later.</div><div>Major Contributor turnovers occurred 2002.05 and 2008.09,412 but in any</div><div>case, people often wrote articles when not listed as Contributors. They all</div><div>certainly knew how to “stay on message.” Many of the Contributors were</div><div>affiliated with think tanks sharing common funders:413</div><div>? Tobacco funding, Fig. F.4.</div><div>? ExxonMobil, API or other petroleum funding</div><div>? Core funding from a few family foundations</div><div>Other authors appeared, including some familiar in climate anti-science</div><div>and various free-lancers whose relevant expertise was unclear.</div><div>§X.2 quotes short biographies from E&CN plus a few comments. The</div><div>reader will find many “fellows,” “analysts” … and very few relevant</div><div>scientists, much less credible climate scientists.</div><div>A PhD seems to be treated as good enough for “truthiness,” whether or not</div><div>the PhD bore much relationship to the topic or whether the person has</div><div>actually done any relevant and credible research lately. In at least one</div><div>case, an emeritus Professor of Biblical Studies (Thomas Derr) was quoted</div><div>for his expertise on CO2.</div><div>
</div><div>411 This included listing in petitions, but not advertisements.</div><div>412 The odd 2005.08 seems an error.</div><div>413 MAS2010 pp.93-95 summarized these, as known in early 2010. More details</div><div>are known now, such as the key funder for Heartland in last few years.</div><div>People can pick up new areas of expertise, but the question is: did they do</div><div>so and are they remotely plausible as experts? In real science, people build</div><div>reputations over years by doing significant research, publishing it in</div><div>credible journals and having it stand up to scrutiny as real contribution.</div><div>Very few people manage to be experts at the wide range of topics on which</div><div>some of these authors write, but then, it is easier to repeat long-debunked</div><div>claims than actually explain topics correctly. Science has many specialties,</div><div>very few of which confer credibility on climate science. The reader should</div><div>wary of fakexperts who challenge the mainstream with no recent record of</div><div>relevant, solid, peer-reviewed publications in credible journals. Some</div><div>publish unremarkable papers, but say very different things to the public.</div><div>Many of these people are touted pervasively as “experts,” “distinguished,”</div><div>“highly respected,” etc. When they talk about science, they often state</div><div>untruths or use facts in ways misleading to a general audience</div><div>Some may know obscure details, but simply reject basic physics.414</div><div>People listed here fall roughly into 3 groups:</div><div>? People long affiliated with conservative think tanks, most</div><div>commonly with backgrounds in law, economics, political science,</div><div>journalism, rarely with published science backgrounds. Most such</div><div>think tanks have taken tobacco money, fossil-interest money or usually</div><div>both. Many use inflated titles, such as President of a non-existent</div><div>organization. Some seem to have done little but advocacy while</div><div>shuttling among think tanks.</div><div>? A few scientists with varying degrees of reputation and publishing</div><div>records. They help by finding peer-reviewed journal articles that can</div><div>be cherry-picked for quotes to confuse a nontechnical audience.415</div><div>Some have made repeated errors that have destroyed any reputation</div><div>they might have once had. Some of these are also affiliated with think</div><div>tanks. This use of “experts” resembles that of §0.7.</div><div>Any PhD can be quoted, whether or not their expertise is relevant.</div><div>? Freelance writers, often with backgrounds of no obvious relevance.</div><div>
</div><div>414 Even a small percentage of physicists, mostly older males, can have other</div><div>reasons strong enough to reject basic physics. See MAS2009.</div><div>415 PRO2012 p.283. “One commonly used trick was to cherry-pick extracts from</div><div>scientific literature sympathetic to the industry and then to publish and distribute</div><div>those extracts to a broad audience.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>88</div><div>Suppose the reader sees authors:</div><div>? repeatedly write factually-wrong arguments to the point of appearing</div><div>in standard catalogs of long-refuted bad ideas.</div><div>? write nonsense about topics for which they have no obvious expertise</div><div>or connection, where the reader knows the people involved or lives</div><div>near the areas being discussed by someone thousands of miles away.</div><div>? reject or ignore sophomore-level physics.</div><div>? continually be referenced as experts deserving credibility. Perhaps</div><div>some are once were experts at something beyond advocacy, but</div><div>expertise in one area does not confer automatic credibility elsewhere.</div><div>The relentless claims of expertise from Heartland invite analysis.</div><div>“Author is non-expert, therefore argument is wrong” is ad hominem.</div><div>“Author is wrong, therefore non-expert, and investigation of background</div><div>shows little or no sign of relevant expertise” is the theme here.</div><div>E&CN sometimes says no more than “X writes from (some place).”</div><div>Heartland and allies create an amplifying echo chamber in which all are</div><div>distinguished experts, regardless of any lack of relevant accomplishments</div><div>by normal standards, but just because they all say they are experts. For an</div><div>articulate counter-argument, a (truly distinguished set of climate scientists)</div><div>created a reply416 to a silly Wall Street Journal OpEd. It seemed another of</div><div>Singer’s open letters signed by mostly-irrelevant people, some of whom are</div><div>not even scientists of any sort, much less current, relevant ones.</div><div>None of this claims that all of these people are always wrong, but when</div><div>most people discover repeated obvious errors on topics they know, they</div><div>rapidly lose faith in the author on other topics.</div><div>E&CN is filled with authors who seem to have spent much of their careers</div><div>in think tanks, in effect as PR people. Some have made careers of</div><div>attacking any mainstream science found inconvenient. I lacked a simple</div><div>term, hence made up fakexpert, which seems to fit.</div><div>
</div><div>416 climatecrocks.com/2012/02/01/scientists-answer-the-wall-street-16</div><div>Being an old male (like George Shultz) does not imply climate anti-science views,</div><div>but if a group has anti-science views, conservative old males are usually found in</div><div>higher proportion than the overall population. MAS2009, MCC2011.</div><div>In the think tank universe:</div><div>? Does having a title “Science Director” mean that one directs scientific</div><div>research? If so, it would be good to see Heartland’s peer-reviewed</div><div>science publications. Heartland claims NIPCC is science. It is not.</div><div>? What do think tank titles “fellow,” “senior fellow,” “policy analyst,”</div><div>“senior policy analyst,” “resident scholar” actually mean? Do people</div><div>have to know much about the topic, or is it sufficient for them to</div><div>cherry-pick an article, spin the meaning, and then add some quotes</div><div>from other “analysts” or a few scientists, always labeled experts?417</div><div>? Some policy topics are legitimately arguable, as are discussions of the</div><div>size and shape of government. Whether any given renewable energy</div><div>project is optimal or even useful can be debatable , but E&CN seems to</div><div>be absolutely certain none are any good or ever will be. Whether any</div><div>given environmental rule gives a good risk/reward ratio is debatable,</div><div>but E&CN seems to argue consistently that nothing produced by</div><div>corporations ever creates any risk for anyone.</div><div>? A steady stream of clear untruths about science from lawyers,</div><div>economists, freelance writers, applied philosophers, is PR advocacy,</div><div>not science or education. It is even tax-free PR.</div><div>418</div><div> Most of E&CN is</div><div>advocacy from a specific political viewpoint shared by these think</div><div>tanks and their funders, designed for delivery to elected officials</div><div>(treetops) and citizens (grassroots).</div><div>? Advocacy is fine if it follows the tax and lobbying rules, so if</div><div>Heartland were a normal tax-paying PR agency, it could write as much</div><div>of this as desired. Heartland could have 501(c)(4) status if it wished,</div><div>but 501(c)(3) public charity status imposes more stringent rules for the</div><div>privilege of tax-exemption.</div><div>? Most think tanks mentioned here have long histories of taking tobacco</div><div>money for purposes that might be hard to label “research and</div><div>education.” That any are acting in the public interest is difficult to</div><div>imagine.</div><div>
</div><div>417 Many E&CN articles display such a mixture.</div><div>418 Tobacco money usually pays for advocacy, not education and t many of their</div><div>fellows and analysts have been writing misleading untruths on climate, perhaps it</div><div>is time to reevaluate charity status for almost every think tank mentioned here? If</div><div>they regularly took tobacco money, what were they doing?</div><div>Actually, some hints can be found in Figure F.5. They did PR and lobbying.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>89</div><div>Each person’s tenure is shown in grey. Roy Marden, Board member from</div><div>Philip Morris, is shown as a reminder that PM funding likely continued</div><div>well after 2001, Fig. F.4. E&CN carried smoking-supportive articles and</div><div>advertisements through his tenure, Fig. W.4.1.</div><div>q quoted or referenced approvingly in that issue</div><div>A Authored article(s) in that issue and perhaps quoted in others</div><div>The Tobacco and Petroleum columns indicate people who have worked for</div><div>think tanks known to have gotten such funding, see [MAS2010, pp.93-95.]</div><div>Red T implies known direct involvement with tobacco, either in writing or</div><div>in editing tobacco-supportive publications.</div><div>By count of appearances and issues, the most prolific authors/quotees were</div><div>Singer, Michaels, Burnett, Cohen and Milloy, of whom Singer, Cohen and</div><div>Milloy were involved in the PM-funded TASSC. §W.4 shows how often</div><div>their names appear in E&CN.</div><div>Fig. X.1.1 E&CN selected contributors</div><div>86</div><div>Thinktank</div><div>funding Tobacco Petrol 2001.06 2001.08 2001.09 2001.10 2001.12 2002.01 2002.02 2002.03 2002.04 2002.05 2002.07 2002.08 2002.09 2002.10 2002.11 2003.01 2003.02 2003.03 2003.05 2003.07 2003.08 2003.09 2003.10 2003.12 2004.01 2004.02 2004.03 2004.05 2004.06 2004.07 2004.08 2004.09 2004.10 2005.01 2005.02 2005.04 2005.05 2005.06 2005.07 2005.08 2005.10 2005.11 2005.12 ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### ####### 2007.02 2007.03 2007.04 2007.05 2007.06 2007.07 2007.09 2007.10 2007.11 2007.12 2008.01 2008.02 2008.03 2008.04 2008.05 2008.07 2008.08 2008.09 2009.01 2009.08 2009.10 2010.08 2010.09 2010.10 2010.11 2011.01 2011.02 2011.03 2011.04 2011.09 2011.10 2011.11 2012.01 # Issues</div><div>Marden, Roy (Board, PM) T 0</div><div>Bast, Joseph T P q q A q q q q q A A A q A A q A q q A q 20</div><div>Bast, Diane Carol T P A A A A A A A 7</div><div>Taylor, James M. (Mg Ed) T P 85</div><div>Lehr, Jay PhD(MgEd/Sci Dir) T P ?</div><div>Avery, Dennis {Hudson} T P q q q A A A q A A q q q q A q A 16</div><div>Baliunas, Sallie HS-CfA, GMI P q q A A q A A A A q q q q q q q 16</div><div>Balling, Robert C. Jr ASU q q q q q q q q 8</div><div>Bishop, Brian ( Rhode Island) q q A A A 5</div><div>Burnett, H. Sterling {NCPA} T P q A A q q A q q q q A A q A qA A q A A q q A A A q A A A q q q A A A q A q A q q A q q A q 45</div><div>Cohen, Bonner {NCPPR, etc} T P A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A q A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 35</div><div>Davis, Robert E. U VA 0</div><div>Driessen, Paul K. {CFACT} P A A A A A A A q A A A q A q A q q A A 19</div><div>Ebell, Myron {CEI} T P q q q q q q q q q q A A A A A A A A q q q q q q q q q q q q q q 32</div><div>Ferguson, Robert {FF, SPPI} T P q q q q A A q q q q q 11</div><div>Gough, Michael {CATO} T P q A 2</div><div>Green, Kenneth {Reason, AEI} T P q A A A q q A q q q 10</div><div>Hoare, James (NY attorney) A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 30</div><div>Johnston, James D. {AEI} T P A A q q 4</div><div>Lieberman, Ben {CEI} T P q q A A A A A A A A A q A A q q q q q q q q q q q 25</div><div>Michaels, Patrick {CATO} T P q q q A q A A q q q A A q q q q q q A A q q q q A A A A A q A A q A A A q q q q q q q q q A q 47</div><div>Milloy, Steve {TASSC+} T P q q A q q q q q q q A q A A q A A A A q q q A A q q q q A A A A A A q 35</div><div>Moore, Thomas Gale{Hoover} P 0</div><div>Murray, Iain {CEI} T P q q q q A A A A A A A q A q q q A q q 19</div><div>Nichols, Nick A A 2</div><div>Ridenour, David {NCPPR} T P A q A q q 5</div><div>Salmon, Jeffrey {GMI} P 0</div><div>Schwartz, Joel {Reason} T P q q A q q q q q q q q q q q A A A A q q A A q A 24</div><div>Singer, S. Fred {SEPP} T P A A A A A A A q A A A A A A A q A A q A A A A A A A A q A A q A q q q A q A q q q q q A A q q 47</div><div>Soon, Willie HS-CfA, GMI P A q q q q q A A q q A q q q q q 16</div><div>Tanton, Tom {IER, PRI} T P q q q q q q q q A q q q A q q A A A A q A q q q A A 26</div><div>Taylor, Jerry {CATO} T P q A A A A A q A A q q q A q q q q q 18</div><div>Utt, Ronald {Heritage} T P A 1</div><div>Idso, Craig (CSCDGC) P q q q A A A A 7</div><div>2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011</div><div>Taylor wrote many articles, as many as 12/issue. Lehr was not so proliific, but appeared quite often, not worth bother to count. Think of E&CN = Taylor, Lehr and some help from others.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>90</div><div>X.2 Brief biographies of relevant authors</div><div>This section lists authors who appeared more than once or that are</div><div>otherwise familiar, plus a few who were quoted in interesting ways.</div><div>Some hit counts are included, as in §W.3. Key people are in red.</div><div>Scott Armstrong419</div><div>“Scott Armstrong is a professor at the Wharton School at the University of</div><div>Pennsylvania.” Z.2008.07-12</div><div>Kenneth Artz</div><div>“Kenneth Artz writes from Dallas, Texas.”</div><div>heartland.org/kenneth-artz Z.2010.11.-5</div><div>Dennis Avery420</div><div>“director of the Hudson Institute‘s Center for Global Food Issues,”</div><div>Z.2007.10-10</div><div>Ronald Bailey421</div><div>“Ronald Bailey is science correspondent for Reason magazine and the editor of</div><div>Earth Report 2000: Revisiting the True State of the Planet” 2002.03-1</div><div>Diane Carol Bast</div><div>“Diane Carol Bast is vice president of The Heartland Institute.”</div><div>Z.2004.01-1</div><div>She is responsible for Heartland’s serial publications and website.</div><div>“Bast is also Heartland’s bookkeeper, managing the organization’s $7.2 million</div><div>budget, working with Heartland’s outside accountant on the annual audit, and</div><div>helping to draft the organization’s annual budget. She is also Heartland's chief</div><div>compliance officer.422</div><div>
</div><div>419Armstrong and colleagues have invented something they call “scientific</div><div>forecasting.” There is room for doubt, but it is good marketing. He has written</div><div>with Willie Soon.</div><div>MAS2010a, pp.110-112 offers more context on Armstrong.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Kesten_Green_and_Scott_Armstrong</div><div>420 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dennis_Avery</div><div>421 reason.com/people/ronald-bailey/all</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ronald_Bailey</div><div>422 Her husband is CEO and she is chief compliance officer. IRS-6G, IRS-7F.</div><div>Prior to joining The Heartland Institute in February 1987, Bast was coeditor of</div><div>the bimonthly magazine Nomos. She received her Bachelor’s of Science degree</div><div>in criminal justice and constitutional law from the University of Wisconsin.”</div><div>423</div><div>Joseph Bast424 445 hits (including Diane Bast)</div><div>“Joseph Bast is president and CEO of The Heartland Institute. Bast has</div><div>been recognized for his contributions to public policy research and</div><div>debate, including being named one of “The 88 to Watch in 1988” by the</div><div>Chicago Tribune; recipient of the 1994 Roe Award from State Policy</div><div>Network; commissioned a Kentucky Colonel by Gov. Paul E. Patton on June 19,</div><div>1996; corecipient of the 1996 Sir Antony Fisher International Memorial Award;</div><div>recipient of the 1998 Eagle Award from Eagle Forum; and recipient of the 2004</div><div>Champion of Liberty award from the Libertarian National Committee. He was</div><div>elected a member of the Philadelphia Society in 2002 and elected to the board of</div><div>directors of the American Conservative Union in 2007.</div><div>Prior to being hired as The Heartland Institute’s first employee in 1984, Bast was</div><div>coeditor of the bimonthly magazine Nomos and studied economics as an</div><div>undergraduate at The University of Chicago.”</div><div>425</div><div>No degree is claimed, just study of economics, but he is claimed to be a global</div><div>warming expert, §G.4.</div><div>Sallie Baliunas426</div><div> 47 hits</div><div>“Sallie Baliunas is an astrophysicist at the Harvard- Smithsonian</div><div>Center for Astrophysics. She serves as deputy director of Mount</div><div>Wilson Observatory and as Senior Scientist at the George C. Marshall</div><div>Institute in Washington, DC.” Z.2003.07-1</div><div>“Dr. Sallie Baliunas served as deputy director of Mount Wilson Observatory and</div><div>as senior scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute in Washington, DC. She</div><div>chairs the institute’s Science Advisory Board and is a former contributing editor</div><div>to World Climate Report. Her email address is…@techcentralstation.com.”</div><div>427</div><div>Z.2004.08-19</div><div>
</div><div>This is yet another family business like SEPP, CSCDGC, NCPPR. Family</div><div>businesses are fine, but the privilege of 501(c)(3) requires good governance.</div><div>423 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Diane_Bast</div><div>www.freedompub.org/profile/DianeCarolBast is interesting, including Paul</div><div>Chesser and Mark Gillar as a friends. Heartland is clearly a “family business.”</div><div>424 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joseph_Bast</div><div>425 heartland.org/joseph-bast</div><div>426 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sallie_Baliunas</div><div>427 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tech_Central_Station</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>91</div><div>E. Calvin Beissner</div><div>“Dr. E. Calvin Beisner is national spokesman for the Cornwall Alliance for the</div><div>Stewardship of Creation.” Z.2008.05-16.</div><div>Brian Bishop</div><div>“Brian Bishop (…) is Rhode Island State Director for the Alliance for America</div><div>and director of Rhode Island Wise Use.” Z.2006.10-14</div><div>Sandy Liddy Bourne428</div><div>“Sandy Liddy Bourne is director of the Natural Resources Task Force for the</div><div>American Legislative Exchange Council” Z.2004.08-1</div><div>Robert l. Bradley, Jr</div><div>“Robert Bradley is president of the Institute for Energy Research in Houston and</div><div>an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute. He received the Julian Simon Memorial</div><div>Award for 2002 and is author, most recently, of Climate Alarmism</div><div>Reconsidered, published by the Institute of Economic Affairs in London.”</div><div>Z.2006.11-5</div><div>Sterling Burnett429</div><div> 335 hits</div><div>“H. Sterling Burnett (…) is a senior fellow at the National Center for</div><div>Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research institute based in</div><div>Dallas.”430 Z.2005.06-5.</div><div>In the ;later years, he seemed to become the “go-to guy” for quotes.</div><div>Somewhat unusually, non-scientist Burnett wrote an article for the National</div><div>Association of Scholars attacking climate science and scientists, using</div><div>“Climategate” again, 12/04/11.431</div><div>
</div><div>428 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sandy_Liddy_Bourne</div><div>429 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=H.Sterling_Burnett</div><div>430 www.desmogblog.com/h-sterling-burnett “Credentials</div><div>PhD, Applied Philosophy, Bowling Green State University (2001).</div><div>MA, Applied Philosophy, Bowling Green State University, (1992).</div><div>BA, Cultural Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, (1986).”</div><div>heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/trlp5</div><div>&div=19&id=&page= Suing Gun Manufacturers: hazardous to Our Health.</div><div>www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?doctype_code=Article&doc_id=2319</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/nas-president-peter-wood-wrong-dishonest-or-hopelesslycompromised</div><div>431 A well-published climate scientist replied:</div><div>www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=2325</div><div>Alan Caruba432</div><div> 21 hits</div><div>“Alan Caruba (…) is founder of the weekly publication Warning Signs and</div><div>founder of the National Anxiety Center.” Z.2006.11-5</div><div>He was also with Tom DeWeese at the American Policy Center.</div><div>Alyssa Carducci 94 hits</div><div>“Alyssa Carducci writes from Tampa, Florida.” Z.2010.08-2</div><div>Thomas Cheplick</div><div>“Thomas Cheplick writes from Cambridge, Massachusetts.”</div><div>heartland.org/thomas-cheplick</div><div>nycwireless.net/2009/12/26/why-no-one-should-talk-to-or-read-anything-fromthe-heartland-institute</div><div>Z.2009.08-6</div><div>
</div><div>Perhaps the NAS President, Peter Wood, wanted another author, given:</div><div>chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/guest-post-bottling-nonsense-mis-using-a-civilplatform</div><div>That cited a detailed analysis of NAS, including funding.</div><div>Scaife and L&H Bradley have long funded both NCPA and NAS, hence the</div><div>inclusion in §ES.1 as an example of a nonobvious connection.</div><div>432 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alan_Caruba</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>92</div><div>Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>“Cheryl K. Chumley is a 2008-09 Phillips Foundation journalism</div><div>fellow.”</div><div>433</div><div>“Cheryl is online editor for Tea Party Review Magazine, a monthly</div><div>national publication that made its debut at CPAC in February. Prior to</div><div>that she was a staff writer at the News & Messenger. Her year-long research into</div><div>NHAs was published at The Heartland Institute and in Townhall Magazine. She</div><div>is also a freelancer with works published in the Washington Examiner, AOL</div><div>News, Tech Central Station, The Heritage Foundation and Capital Research</div><div>Center.”434</div><div>“Cheryl K. Chumley writes from Northern Virginia.” Z.2010.08-9a</div><div>It is not yet clear why she has relevant expertise to write about mercury in</div><div>Wisconsin or later, sea level and the Netherlands.</div><div>Bonner R. Cohen435 202 hits</div><div>“Bonner R. Cohen is a senior fellow at the Lexington Institute in</div><div>Arlington, Virginia” Z.2001.13-1</div><div>“Bonner R. Cohen is a senior fellow at the National Center for Public</div><div>Policy Research in Washington, DC.” Z.2003.07-1</div><div>www.nationalcenter.org/bios/cohen.html He was also affiliated with CFACT.</div><div>Cohen was involved in TASSC, actually became President,</div><div>436 and as seen in an</div><div>internal Philip Morris International letter 12/22/92, they liked his work:437</div><div>‘As many of you know, the EPA is now expected to release its final report the</div><div>first week in January 1993 .</div><div>
</div><div>433 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Phillips_Foundation</div><div>www.thephillipsfoundation.org/fellows/all/novak_profiles.cfm</div><div>434www.thephillipsfoundation.org/fellows/all/novak_profiles.cfm#fellows/2008/ch</div><div>eryl_kchumley/novak_profiles.cfm</div><div>www.humanevents.com/search.php?author_name=Cheryl+K.+Chumley :</div><div>www.phoenix.edu/about_us/media-center/fact-checker/what-others-are-sayingabout-propublica.html</div><div>435 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bonner_Cohen</div><div>436 www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=709 says:</div><div>“Bonner Cohen headed EPA Watch, which received funding from Philip Morris.</div><div>He purported to edit EPA Watch as an independent newsletter published and</div><div>distributed by the non-profit American Policy Center, but in fact it was a</div><div>publication of the APCO & Associates PR Group, originally owned by Philip</div><div>Morris's Washington legal firm, Arnold & Porter (i.e. A&P Co = APCO)”</div><div>437 www.legacy.library.ucsf.edu/documentStore/s/o/a/soa42e00/Ssoa42e00.pdf</div><div>The following issue materials have been put together to provide you with</div><div>information which can be used to challenge the credibility of the EPA's</div><div>regulatory decisions . Attached are the following materials :</div><div>o EPA WATCH, Volume 3. Number 15, October 30, 1992, by the American</div><div>Policy Center, editor Dr . Bonner R. Cohen .</div><div>- Discusses The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), study which</div><div>criticizes the EPA's "command-and-control approach" to indoor air regulations</div><div>as being " . . :'susceptible to political manipulation, is unresponsive to local</div><div>information, and almost always results in higher costs ."</div><div>The Next Environmental Battleground : Indoor Air,1t by Dwight</div><div>R . Lee, National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), 1992.’</div><div>Roger Cohen</div><div>“Roger W. Cohen ( …) is a fellow of the American Physical Society.”</div><div>Roger Cohen was actually a long time ExxonMobil employee, now</div><div>retired, and one of the 6 organizers of the 2009 APS Petition. 438</div><div>
</div><div>Z.2011.02-16</div><div>Michael Crichton (quotee) 236 hits</div><div>In “Crichton Strikes Devastating Blow to Alarmists” §Y.2,</div><div>8 articles and 20 “Crichton is Right!” half-page advertisements</div><div>Michael Coulter</div><div>“Michael Coulter (…) teaches political science at Grove City College.”</div><div>439</div><div>Z.2007.02-3</div><div>Donn Dears</div><div>“Donn Dears is president of TSAugust, a nonprofit think tank, and a retired</div><div>General Electric Company executive with extensive experience in power</div><div>generation, transmission, distribution, and related equipment. This essay is</div><div>excerpted from his book Carbon Folly: CO2 Emission Sources and Options, ….</div><div>Dears also operates the www.carbonfolly.com Web site.” Z.2008.07-16</div><div>
</div><div>438 MAS2009 pp.84-85.</div><div>439 Grove City was ranked by USNWR as the 2nd most conservative US college.</div><div>Past President John H. Moore has been a long-time GMI Board member,</div><div>MAS2010 pp.63-64.</div><div>www.webcitation.org/query?id=1257024031450771</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grove_City_College</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>93</div><div>Thomas Siegel Derr (quotee) 11 hits</div><div>“bioethicist Thomas Derr, a professor at Smith College” Z.2009.08-6</div><div>“Professor Thomas Derr of Smith College” Z.2010.09-10 2</div><div>He is actually a Professor Emeritus of Religion and Biblical Literature, likely</div><div>about 80 years old, half spent at Smith College. 440</div><div>He has blogged often on climate,</div><div>441 but the reader might peruse those articles.</div><div>For example, in “The End of the Global Warming Scare?” is found:</div><div>“On the theory that rising CO2 emissions should lead to increased temperatures,</div><div>we should have been experiencing steadily increasing warming, as we have</div><div>certainly had steadily increasing CO2 discharged into the atmosphere. But the</div><div>contrary has happened. Meme-04 Global average temperatures have been flat for</div><div>the past decade, since 1998, and actually declined somewhat last year.” Meme-07</div><div>Is Derr statistically illiterate with regard to noisy time series? §Z.</div><div>Tom DeWeese 15 hits</div><div>“Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center.”</div><div>Z.2007.06-18 americanpolicy.org is a 501(c)4, he seems to write</div><div>everything. See also Bonner Cohen, who edited EPA Watch.</div><div>Alan Caruba was also involved. Both are advisors of Sovereignty International,</div><div>Z.2007.10-5.</div><div>
</div><div>440 “He came to Smith in 1963, where he teaches courses in applied ethics: ethics</div><div>in medicine, business, statecraft and international relations, the environment,</div><div>sexual matters, race relations, war and church-state issues.”</div><div>www.smith.edu/religion/faculty_derr.php</div><div>CO2 was much higher long ago, but humans did not exist and substantial parts of</div><div>the USA were under water, such as Florida.</div><div>Ethics: Derr’s comments show little knowledge of the science. Do readers</div><div>consider it ethical for him to make these comments? Is it ethical to help an</div><div>organization that has long supported tobacco companies? He seems an old man</div><div>wit strong opinions writing about topics of which he demonstrates ignorance, but</div><div>then, likely conditions in 2050 obviously do not matter to him.</div><div>441 www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/author/thomas-sieger-derr</div><div>He offers: “BEST on Climate Change,” “The Significance of Climategate,”</div><div>“Climate Politics (But Not the Planet) Heat Up,” “Is Environmentalism Really a</div><div>Religion?” “The End of the Global Warming Scare?” “The Global Warming</div><div>Crusade” “The Bali Conference Is Over (Whew!)” “The Pope on Climate</div><div>Alarmism” He is entitled to his opinions, no matter how ill-informed, but</div><div>likewise, others are entitled to point that out.</div><div>David H. Douglass442</div><div> 12 hits</div><div>“David H. Douglass (…) is professor of physics at the University of Rochester.”</div><div>Z.2004.10-7</div><div>Paul Driessen</div><div>443CFACT 131 hits</div><div>“Paul Driessen is a senior policy analyst for the Committee for a</div><div>Constructive Tomorrow and principal of Global-Comm Partners in</div><div>Fairfax, Virginia.” Z.2001.10-16</div><div>“Paul Driessen is a senior fellow for CFACT and the Atlas Economic Research</div><div>Foundation. His new book, Eco-Imperialism: Green Power - Black Death,</div><div>inspired the Cancun event and explores these issues in depth.” Z.2004.01-9.</div><div>“Paul Driessen (…) is a senior fellow at the Congress of Racial Equality and</div><div>author of Eco-Imperialism: Green Power; Black Death.” 2006.05-7</div><div>“Paul Driessen is a senior policy analyst for the Committee for a Constructive</div><div>Tomorrow” (CFACT) Z.2010.09-17</div><div>John Dale Dunn444</div><div>
</div><div>“John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D. (… ) lives in Lake Brownwood, Texas.”</div><div>Z.3006.12-16</div><div>“Dr. John Dale Dunn (…), an inactive attorney, teaches emergency medicine at</div><div>Fort Hood, Texas and is a member of the Science and Policy Advisory Board of</div><div>the American Council on Science and Health.” Z.2007.04-8</div><div>Myron Ebell (CEI)445 108 hits</div><div>“Myron Ebell oversees global warming and international environmental work at</div><div>the Competitive Enterprise Institute (www.cei.org). He also chairs the Cooler</div><div>Heads Coalition, a subgroup of the National Consumers Coalition that focuses</div><div>on climate change issues..” Z.2004.07-3</div><div>Ebell was a key player in developing the attack on The Hockey Stick.446</div><div>
</div><div>442 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_Douglass; APS2009</div><div>443 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Driessen</div><div>444 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Dale_Dunn</div><div>445 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Myron_Ebell</div><div>446 MAS2010 and MAS2010a.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>94</div><div>Robert Ferguson447</div><div> 62 hits</div><div>“Robert Ferguson (…) is president of the Science and Public Policy Institute.</div><div>This article originally appeared on Foxnews.com on September 27. INTERNET”</div><div>Z.2007.12-11</div><div>SPPI is effectively Ferguson with some web help, using a PO Box in a UPS store</div><div>within walking distance from his house, §K.3. Ferguson is an employee of</div><div>CSCDGC and SPPI is not a public charity. This fake organization’s website</div><div>could be labeled: “a branch of CSCDGC, brought to you by Lambe (Kochs),</div><div>L&H Bradley and DONORS CAPITAL.” Fig. K.1.1.b.</div><div>Jerry Flint</div><div>“Jerry Flint, a former Forbes senior editor, has covered the automobile industry</div><div>since 1958. Reprinted by permission of Forbes magazine.” Z.2004.04-13</div><div>Duane Freese</div><div>“Duane D. Freese is former member of the USA Today editorial board and a</div><div>columnist for Tech Central Station (www.techcentralstation.com),</div><div>where this essay first appeared” Z.2004.02-1b</div><div>Michael Fumento448</div><div> 17 hits</div><div>“Michael Fumento (…) is a syndicated journalist and a senior fellow at the</div><div>Hudson Institute. An earlier version of this article appeared on Fumento ‘s Web</div><div>site, www.fumento.com” Z.2004.02-1b</div><div>Paul Georgia449</div><div>“Paul Georgia is an environmental policy analyst with the Competitive</div><div>Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC and managing editor of the Cooler Heads</div><div>newsletter.” Z.2001.06-4</div><div>Kenneth Green450</div><div>“Kenneth Green is chief scientist ... of the Reason Foundation’s Environmental</div><div>Program” Z.2002.05-5</div><div>
</div><div>447www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Ferguson%28Science_and_Pub</div><div>lic_Policy_Institute%29</div><div>448 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Fumento CEI, Reason.</div><div>449 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Georgia</div><div>450 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kenneth_Green</div><div>www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/11/27/we-berate-you-deride-a-closer-look-atthe-background-of-steven-j-milloy-executive-director-of-demanddebatecom</div><div>“Dr. Kenneth Green is chief scientist and director for the Risk & Environment</div><div>Centre at the Fraser Institute.” Z.2003.12-09</div><div>“Kenneth Green (…) is a resident scholar with the American Enterprise</div><div>Institute.” Z.2006.12-5</div><div>“Kenneth Green, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and author</div><div>of the book Global Warming, Understanding the Debate…” Z.2008.0512</div><div>Howard C. Hayden451</div><div> 39 hits</div><div>“Howard C. Hayden, Ph.D. (…) is professor emeritus of physics at the</div><div>University of Connecticut and adjunct professor at Colorado State University at</div><div>Pueblo. He writes a monthly energy newsletter available for a $35 annual</div><div>subscription at The Energy Advocate, …” Z.2007.09-17.</div><div>Michael Heberling</div><div>“Michael Heberling is president of the Baker College Center for Graduate</div><div>Studies in Flint, Michigan.” Z.2002.07-9</div><div> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_College</div><div>James Hoare 193 hits</div><div>“James Hoare (…) is managing attorney at the Syracuse, New York office of</div><div>McGivney, Kluger & Gannon..” Z.2005.12-9</div><div>“James Hoare (…) is an attorney practicing in Rochester, New York.”</div><div>Z.2007.09-5</div><div>Craig D. Idso452</div><div> 86 hits (including Sherwood or Keith)</div><div>“Craig D. Idso, Ph.D. (…), is lead author of Climate Change Reconsidered,</div><div>published by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change</div><div>(NIPCC)..” Z.2011.04-13</div><div>Harriette Johnson</div><div>“Harriette Johnson (…) is media relations manager for The Heartland Institute..”</div><div>Z.2008.05-17</div><div>
</div><div>451 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Howard_Hayden MAS2009</div><div>452 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Craig_Idso</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>95</div><div>James Johnston453</div><div>“James Johnston is a senior fellow with the American Enterprise Institute and</div><div>author of Driving America: Your Car, Your Government Your Choice</div><div>(Washington, C: AEI Press, 1997).” Z.2001.08-6</div><div>Robert Jastrow454</div><div>“Robert Jastrow is chairman of the George C. Marshall Institute.” Z.2001.12-4</div><div>S. T. Karnick</div><div>“S.T. Karnick (…) is senior editor of The Heartland Institute, an associate fellow</div><div>of the Sagamore Institute for Policy Research, and coeditor of The Reform</div><div>Club.” Z.2005.07-13</div><div>Vaclav Klaus455</div><div>“Vaclav Klaus is president of the Czech Republic.” Z.2007.09-2</div><div>Jeff Kueter456</div><div> 9 hits</div><div>“Jeff Kueter is executive director of the George Marshall Institute.”</div><div>Z.2003.01-3</div><div>Jay Lehr, Phd457</div><div>“Jay Lehr is science director for The Heartland Institute.” Z.2003.12-1b</div><div>Marlo Lewis, Jr458</div><div> 49 hits</div><div>“Marlo Lewis, Jr. is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.”</div><div>Z.2002.07-6</div><div>
</div><div>453 Jim Johnston spent most of his career as economist for BP Amoco</div><div>heartland.org/james-l-johnston</div><div>454 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Jastrow</div><div>455 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Vaclav_Klaus</div><div>456 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jeff_Kueter</div><div>457 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jay_Lehr</div><div>www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMA9D-ZWwrg leads with Lehr telling people</div><div>“It’s the sun” and expect new Ice Age. Zero credibility.</div><div>458 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marlo_Lewis</div><div>Ben Lieberman459</div><div>“Ben Lieberman is a senior policy analyst with the Competitive</div><div>Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC.” Z.2002.04-7a</div><div>“Ben Lieberman is director of clean air policy with the Competitive</div><div>Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC.” Z.2003.08-1</div><div>“Ben Lieberman, senior policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation” 2005.08-3</div><div>“Ben Lieberman, senior fellow and air quality expert at The Heritage</div><div>Foundation” 2006.01-16</div><div>“Ben Lieberman, an environmental fellow at the Competitive Enterprise</div><div>Institute” 2010.11.06</div><div>Richard Lindzen460</div><div> 99 hits</div><div>“Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at</div><div>MIT. This article first appeared in the July 2 issue of The Wall Street Journal</div><div>and is reprinted with permission.” Z.2006.08-141</div><div>Lindzen is arguably the best scientist arguing against the mainstream position,</div><div>although his efforts of last decade have not stood up well.</div><div>461</div><div>“In a 2001 profile in Newsweek, journalist Fred Guterl wrote that Lindzen</div><div>"clearly relishes the role of naysayer. He'll even expound on how weakly lung</div><div>cancer is linked to cigarette smoking."[14] James Hansen recalls meeting Lindzen</div><div>whilst testifying before the Vice President's Climate Task Force: "I considered</div><div>asking Lindzen if he still believed there was no connection between smoking and</div><div>lung cancer. He had been a witness for tobacco companies decades earlier,</div><div>questioning the reliability of statistical connections between smoking and health</div><div>problems. But I decided that would be too confrontational. When I met him at a</div><div>later conference, I did ask that question, and was surprised by his response: He</div><div>began rattling off all the problems with the date relating smoking to health</div><div>problems, which was closely analogous to his views of climate data." 462</div><div>TASSC invited him 463 and a search in LTDL for Lindzen gets many hits.</div><div>Tobacco companies often funded efforts to cast doubts on mainstream science in</div><div>general, perhaps to “hide in the crowd.’ Steve Milloy and TASSC formed a</div><div>good example, wherein pseudoscience and inconvenient mainstream science</div><div>were conflated as “junk science” and preferred viewpoints lauded as “sound</div><div>science.” Whenever the reader sees “sound science” here, it is a good idea to</div><div>think “invented for tobacco companies.”</div><div>
</div><div>459 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ben_Lieberman</div><div>460 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Lindzen</div><div>461 www.skepticalscience.com/Lindzen_Illusions.htm is especially useful.</div><div>462 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_S.Lindzen</div><div>463 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yyh09e00/pdf?search=%22richard%20lindzen%22</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>96</div><div>Roy Marden464 (Philip Morris. Heartland Board, at least 1996-2008)</div><div>‘Develop a system for the application of emerging issue analysis to bottomline</div><div>impact on PM; e .g., the rightward shift in the U .S. political climate has resulted</div><div>in the reemergence of property rights as an issue under current scrutiny . As part</div><div>of an intra-company task force, we are developing a strategy to apply the concept</div><div>of "takings" to the smoking ban issue in a legislative/regulatory context . This</div><div>activity and analogous activities on other issues will continue apace in 1996.’</div><div>465</div><div>Maureen Martin 41 hits</div><div>“ Maureen Martin is senior fellow for legal affairs at The Heartland</div><div>Institute.” Z.2008.05-10</div><div>“Maureen Martin, J.D. has practiced environmental law for 25 years.</div><div>She is senior fellow for legal affairs at The Heartland Institute.” Z.2011.03-11</div><div>To her assess her credibility and competence, the reader might check that, in</div><div>which she lauded Viscount Christopher Monckton as a “science expert.” She</div><div>coauthored “Welcome to Heartlands’ Smoker’s Lounge!” §G.1 last page.</div><div>466</div><div>Ross McKitrick467 (quotee) 68 hits</div><div>Economics Professor at U of Guelph, Ontario Z.2002.01-6</div><div>McKitrick was recruited early in the attack on the hockey-stick, has been</div><div>involved with Heartland, CEI, GMI.468</div><div>Pat Michaels469</div><div> 205 hits</div><div>“Patrick J. Michaels is a senior fellow at the Washington-based Cato</div><div>Institute and coauthor of The Satanic Gases” (2002)</div><div>“Patrick J. Michaels is senior fellow in environmental studies at the</div><div>Cato Institute and an advisor to the American Legislative Exchange</div><div>Council.” Z.2003.01-8</div><div>“Patrick J. Michaels (…) is senior fellow in environmental studies at the Cato</div><div>Institute and author of Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming</div><div>by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media. This article first appeared in the</div><div>American Spectator and is reprinted with permission.” Z.2005.06-16</div><div>
</div><div>464 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Roy_Marden</div><div>465 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/crs75c00/pdf performance review, 1995.</div><div>This may refer, in part to Defenders of Property Rights (DPR), James Taylor’s</div><div>first employer after J.D.</div><div>466 heartland.org/policy-documents/welcome-heartlands-smokers-lounge</div><div>467 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ross_McKitrick</div><div>468 MAS2010, MAS2010a.</div><div>469 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Michaels</div><div>He has been convincingly labeled “a serial deleter of inconvenient data.”470</div><div>Dan Miller</div><div>“Dan Miller (…) is executive vice president and publisher of The Heartland</div><div>Institute.” Z.2009.08-4</div><div>Steven Milloy471</div><div> 146 hits</div><div>“Steven Milloy, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and publisher</div><div>ofJunkScience.com” 2001.08-3</div><div>“Steven Milloy, President</div><div>Citizens for the Integrity of Science” 2003.05-7.</div><div>TASSC was started by Philip Morris, but ExxonMobil gave $10K</div><div>each in 2000 and 2001. Bonner Cohen was involved. Milloy has long history.472</div><div>Iain Murray473</div><div> 86 hits</div><div>“Iain Murray is a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.”</div><div>(Z.2004.07-10)</div><div>“Iain Murray (…) is a senior fellow of the Competitive Enterprise</div><div>Institute (…), where he specializes in the debate over climate change and the use</div><div>and abuse of science in the political process.” Z.2004.09-9 474</div><div>Brady Nelson</div><div>“D. Brady Nelson is a Milwaukee-based freelance economist.” Z.2011.01-10</div><div>
</div><div>470 www.skepticalscience.com/patrick-michaels-serial-deleter-of-inconvenientdata.html</div><div>471 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steve_Milloy</div><div>472www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/11/27/we-berate-you-deride-a-closer-lookat-the-background-of-steven-j-milloy-executive-director-of-demanddebatecom/</div><div>
</div><div>473 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iain_Murray</div><div>474 cei.org/expert/iain-murray</div><div>“Before coming to CEI, Mr. Murray was Senior Analyst and then Director of</div><div>Research at the Statistical Assessment Service, a nonpartisan nonprofit…”</div><div>MAS2010 p.75 on STATS, p.95 on funding from Richard Mellon Scaife, etc.</div><div>Interpretation of his degrees takes some knowledge of the UK, i.e., Oxford or</div><div>Cambridge MA is awarded automatically 3 years after the BA.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>97</div><div>William O’Keefe475</div><div> 28 hits</div><div>“William O’Keefe is CEO of the George C. Marshall Institute.” Z.2008.04-12</div><div>He had been an ExxonMobil lobbyist and 25-year veteran of API.476</div><div>Nick Nichols477</div><div>“Nick Nichols is CEO of Nichols-Dezenhall crisis management in Washington,</div><div>C and author of Rules for Corporate Warriors: How to fight and survive attack</div><div>group shakedowns, due out this fall.” Z.2001.10-16</div><div>Amy Ridenour478</div><div>“Amy Ridenour is president of The National Center for Public Policy</div><div>Research.” Z.2004.06-10479</div><div>NCPPR is another family business that has taken tobacco money.</div><div>David Ridenour 20 hits (including Amy)</div><div>“David Ridenour (…) is vice president of the National Center for</div><div>Public Policy Research.” Z.2007.02-10</div><div>Peter Risdon</div><div>“Peter Risdon blogs at freebornjohn.blogspot.com.”</div><div>freebornjohn.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-hockey-stick-graph.html</div><div>He has now moved: www.peterrisdon.com/blog</div><div>Can Heartland find nobody more knowledgeable than this blogger?</div><div>I cannot guarantee credibility of the following source, but it is certainly</div><div>interesting and seems consistent. Read it for what it’s worth:</div><div>nobodylikesagrass.com/index.html Z.2008.07</div><div>Later, a slightly different bio appeared. Maybe it is true, although I found no</div><div>trace of him in Google Scholar and his blog features strong political views, but</div><div>not much real science.</div><div>“Peter Risdon (…) is a geologist and earth scientist with 34 years of experience</div><div>as a scientist.” Z.2008.09-12</div><div>
</div><div>475 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=William_O%27Keefe</div><div>476 MAS2010 p.133, 144</div><div>477 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nick_Nichols</div><div>478 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Amy_Ridenour</div><div>479 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Ridenour Under maiden name Amy Moritz, she</div><div>appears very often in LTDL.</div><div>Krstle Russin</div><div>“Krystle Russin writes from Texas.” Z.2009.01-8</div><div>https://www.spj.org/fdb-detail.asp?cmd=&ref=436</div><div>“Specializes in: Celebrity Profiles, Features, Government, Sports, Politics,</div><div>Business, Entertainment, Medicine, Lifestyle, Travel, Education, Animals,</div><div>Environment, Science, Photography, Photojournalism, Music, Arts, etc.”</div><div>www.thelegendaryricharde.com/biography cookbook author, model, journalist</div><div>www.mademan.com/chickipedia/krystle-russin</div><div>Glenn R. Schleede</div><div>“Glenn R.Schleede is a policy analyst with Energy Market&Policy</div><div>Analysis,Inc”</div><div>480</div><div> Z.2001.06-10</div><div>Joel Schwartz481</div><div>“Joel Schwartz is senior scientist, of the Reason Foundation’s Environmental</div><div>Program”. Z.2002.05-5</div><div>‘Joel Schwartz’s 45-page study for the Competitive Enterprise Institute,</div><div>“Particulate Air Pollution: Weighing the Risks,…’ Z.2003.07.16</div><div>“…concurred Joel Schwartz, contributing author to Tech Central Station and a</div><div>visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.” Z.2004.05</div><div>“Joel Schwartz (…) is a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a</div><div>senior fellow with the Reason Public Policy Institute, and author of the AEI</div><div>report Finding Better Ways to Achieve Cleaner Air (2004).” Z.2005.05-4</div><div>“Joel Schwartz, an air quality scientist at the American Enterprise Institute,”</div><div>Z.2006.04-10</div><div>“Air pollution expert Joel Schwartz explained the problem…” Z.2006.11-14</div><div>Frederick Seitz482</div><div>“Frederick Seitz is president emeritus of Rockefeller University and past</div><div>president of the National Academy of Sciences..” Z.2001.12-4</div><div>
</div><div>480 See docs.wind-watch.org/Schleede-NRELresponse.pdf</div><div>“In this connection, it seems relevant to note that Mr. Schleede has also been an</div><div>active campaigner against the Kyoto Agreement on global warming and that he is</div><div>a former Senior Vice President of the National Coal Association.”</div><div>EMPA was Schleede ‘s consulting practice:</div><div>www.mnforsustain.org/author_schleede_glenn.htm</div><div>481 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joel_M.Schwartz</div><div>482 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frederick_Seitz</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>98</div><div>Daniel R. Simmons, Esq 483</div><div>“Daniel R. Simmons (…) is director of the Natural Resources Task Force of the</div><div>American Legislative Exchange Council.” Z.2006.11-14</div><div>S. Fred Singer484</div><div> 314 hits</div><div>“S.Fred Singer is professor emeritus of environmental sciences at</div><div>the University of Virginia and president of the Science &</div><div>Environmental Policy Project. Singer’s “The Week that Was”</div><div>columns can found on the Internet at www.sepp.org.” Z.2001.06-1a</div><div>Willie Soon485</div><div> 84 hits</div><div>“Willie Soon is a physicist at the Solar and Stellar Physics Division of</div><div>the Harvard- Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and an astronomer at</div><div>the Mount Wilson Observatory. He is also a senior scientist at the</div><div>George C. Marshall Institute and science director for TechCentral Station.”</div><div>Z.2003.07-1</div><div>Roy Spencer 486</div><div> 19 hits</div><div>Roy Spencer (…) is a principal research scientist for the University of</div><div>Alabama in Huntsville and a former senior scientist for climate studies</div><div>at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. This</div><div>article first appeared on Tech Central Station and is reprinted with permission.”</div><div>Z.2005.05 -12</div><div>“Roy Spencer, Ph.D. (…) is a principal research scientist for the University of</div><div>Alabama at Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced</div><div>Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA’s Aqua satellite. This</div><div>article first appeared at DrRoySpencer.com.”487 Z.2010.08-11</div><div>Roy has been wrong, often. 488</div><div>
</div><div>483 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Daniel_Simmons</div><div>484 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fred_Singer</div><div>485 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Willie_Soon</div><div>486 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Roy_Spencer</div><div>487 He is also on Board of GMI.</div><div>488 www.skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Roy_Spencer.htm</div><div>Thomas Tanton 155 hits</div><div>““Geothermal power plants tend to emit hydrogen sulfide (H2S)—</div><div>which is toxic at fairly low levels—and mercury,” said Tom Tanton,</div><div>general manager for renewables and hydropower at the Electric Power</div><div>Research Institute.” Z.2004.07-11</div><div>Thomas Tanton (…) is vice president and senior fellow at the Institute for</div><div>Energy Research.. (Z.2006.11-1a) IER is located in Houston. The reader might</div><div>wonder if there is any connection of IER with petroleum industry?</div><div>“Tom Tanton, a fellow at the San Francisco-based Pacific Research Institute.”</div><div>Z.2008.03-1</div><div>“Tom Tanton (…) is principal of T2 & Associates, a California- based energy</div><div>technology and policy consulting group.” 2010.09-13</div><div>“Tom Tanton, president of the energy consulting firm T2 & Associates”</div><div>Z/2010.11-18</div><div>“Tom Tanton, former principal advisor at the California Energy</div><div>Commission(CEC)…” z.2011.09-14</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>99</div><div>James M. Taylor489</div><div> Heartland</div><div> “James M. Taylor, J.D., is a senior fellow with The Heartland</div><div>Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News. He has</div><div>appeared on the Fox News Channel and the “Good Morning America”</div><div>and “Newsmakers” national radio programs. His writing on</div><div>environmental issues has appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Houston Chronicle,</div><div>Detroit News, Boston Globe, Tampa Tribune, and elsewhere. Taylor previously</div><div>served as managing editor of CCH Incorporated’s disability law publications,</div><div>where he became a nationally known expert and frequent speaker on a variety of</div><div>employment law topics. Prior to that he was a legal analyst for Defenders of</div><div>Property Rights, 490 a public interest legal foundation. Taylor received his B.A.</div><div>from Dartmouth College and his J.D. from the Syracuse University College of</div><div>Law, where he was president of the local chapter of the Federalist Society and</div><div>founder and editor-in-chief of the Federalist Voice.”</div><div>491</div><div> He also writes for</div><div>Forbes,</div><div>492 where his profile includes:493</div><div>“I studied atmospheric science494 and majored in government at Dartmouth</div><div>College.”</div><div>Taylor seems to have been politically-oriented before becoming a lawyer, but</div><div>also seems to have found a more visible career outside law. His E&CN is filled</div><div>with pervasive factual untruths, attacks on science, denigrations of scientists and</div><div>exaggerations of credentials of those that agree with him.</div><div>
</div><div>489 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_M.Taylor</div><div>heartland.org/james-m-taylor</div><div>490 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Defenders_of_Property_Rights</div><div>DPR is yet another think tank that sought and received tobacco money.</div><div>491 ftp://ftp.nmenv.state.nm.us/www/EIB/June_21_2010_Meeting/EIB%2010-</div><div>04/EIB%2010-04%20Pleading%20Document%2037/Ex%207%20-</div><div>%20What%20scientist%20really%20say%20about%20GW.pdf</div><div>492 blogs.forbes.com/jamestaylor</div><div>“I studied atmospheric science and majored in government at Dartmouth</div><div>College. I obtained my Juris Doctorate from Syracuse University.”</div><div>www.jamesmadison.org/press-room/2010-may13-fyi-james-taylor-j-d-of-theheartland-institute-joins-jmi-research-advisory-council.html</div><div>Does “studied atmospheric science” mean took a course?</div><div>493 blogs.forbes.com/people/jamestaylor 01/27/12.</div><div>494 Really?</div><div>Jerry Taylor495</div><div>“As the Cato Institute’s director of natural resource studies, Jerry Taylor</div><div>challenges the “market failure” critique of capitalism as it pertains to energy</div><div>policy and environmental protection.” Z,2001.08-14 (interview)</div><div>Drew Thornley</div><div>“Drew Thornley (…) is a policy analyst at the Texas Public Policy Foundation.”</div><div>Z.2008.02-1 actually: 496</div><div>“I'm an independent public-policy analyst, adjunct and part-time university</div><div>lecturer, and licensed attorney (Alabama). A native of Jasper, Alabama, I'm a</div><div>2002 graduate of The University of Alabama (B.A., economics, summa cum</div><div>laude) and a 2005 graduate of Harvard Law School (J.D.). I reside in Austin,</div><div>Texas. Do you have research, writing, speaking, and/or consulting needs”</div><div>He seems a young “gun-for-hire.”</div><div>Elizabeth Whelan497</div><div>“Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan (…) is president of the American Council on Science</div><div>and Health. This article first appeared May 31, 2006, on</div><div>the IntellectualConservative.com Web site and is reprinted with permission.”</div><div>Z.2006.07-18</div><div>Except for cigarettes, ACSH seems sure that commercial products never</div><div>cause harm to people’s health.498</div><div>David Wojick499</div><div> 12 hits</div><div>“David Wojick is an independent science journalist and policy analyst..”</div><div>Z.2003.10-1</div><div>
</div><div>495 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jerry_Taylor</div><div>496 drewthornley.com.</div><div>www.manhattan-institute.org/energymyths/about.htm</div><div>497 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Whelan</div><div>498 Just as it took many decades for scientists to establish risks of smoking, it may</div><div>take many years to truly calibrate the level of risk in commercial products and</div><div>people can and do exaggerate. But ACSH’s views seem strongly aligned with</div><div>those of its contributors. Whelan is well paid (2009: $325K salary of $1.2M</div><div>revenue, i.e., 25%) for running ACSH.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ACSH</div><div>499 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_E.Wojick</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>100</div><div>Y. E&CN – the most common deceptions</div><div>Y.1 Global Satellite Temperatures</div><div>EARTHTRACK (Warning: technical). Meme-38</div><div>E&CN seems read primarily by elected government officials, for whom</div><div>these charts and commentaries are seriously misleading. They appear in</div><div>every issue here except Sept 2004 and use UAH results from Roy</div><div>Spencer500 and John Christy, 501 which earlier claimed cooling. Singer</div><div>depended on these UAH satellite results to refute AGW, but early results</div><div>kept changing as computational errors were found, often by others.</div><div>“SEPTEMBER 2003</div><div>The global average temperature (top) for September was 0.17°C</div><div>above normal. The Northern Hemisphere’s temperature (middle)</div><div>was 0.31°C above normal. The Southern Hemisphere’s</div><div>temperature (bottom) was 0.03°C above normal.”</div><div>“Each month, Earth Track updates the global averaged satellite</div><div>measurements of the Earth’s temperature. These numbers are</div><div>important because they are real—not projections, forecasts, or</div><div>guesses. Global satellite measurements are made from a series of</div><div>orbiting platforms that sense the average temperature in various</div><div>atmospheric layers. Here, we present the lowest level, which</div><div>climate models say should be warming. Meme-38 The satellite</div><div>measurements are considered accurate to within 0.01°C.”</div><div>These charts are very misleading in several ways:502 IRS-2E, IRS-4E</div><div>1) Calling these numbers “real” is absurd, as computing them is tricky.</div><div>2) Surface and other satellite analyses showed warming. UAH erred.</div><div>3) The claim of 0.01C accuracy is silly.</div><div>4) The untrained eye cannot determine trends in noisy data. Heartland</div><div>never showed the trend lines. Each month, Heartland took global</div><div>temperatures from the next-to-last line of the UAH file and ignored trend</div><div>numbers computed on the last line. This is “how to lie with graphs.”</div><div>5) Heartland and Singer routinely disparage surface stations, ignore more</div><div>reliable satellite analyses and treat (error-prone) UAH as absolute truth.</div><div>
</div><div>500 www.desmogblog.com/roy-spencer; www.drroyspencer.com</div><div> www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Roy_Spencer</div><div>501 www.desmogblog.com/john-christy</div><div> www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Christy</div><div>502 Grant Foster, NOISE-Lies, Damned Lies, and Denial of Global Warming</div><div>(2010) is a short, readable introduction to lies, statistics and graphs.</div><div>1) Calling these numbers “real” is absurd, computing them is tricky.</div><div>“Satellites do not measure temperature directly. They measure radiances in</div><div>various wavelength bands, from which temperature may be inferred.</div><div>[1][2] …. As a</div><div>result, different groups that have analyzed the satellite data have obtained</div><div>different temperature data. Among these groups are Remote Sensing Systems</div><div>(RSS) and the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). The satellite series</div><div>… is constructed from a series of satellites with similar but not identical</div><div>instrumentation. The sensors deteriorate over time, and corrections are necessary</div><div>for satellite drift and orbital decay.” 503</div><div>
</div><div>504</div><div>2) Surface and other satellite results showed warming. UAH erred.</div><div>UAH did good work to compute the first satellite results, but they</div><div>contradicted others, mostly by software errors. Andrew Freedman recently</div><div>wrote a relatively nontechnical introduction505 with the following graph:</div><div>Early nonwarming</div><div>
</div><div>illusion was</div><div>created by</div><div>UAH errors,</div><div>often found by</div><div>others. With</div><div>fixes, the UAH</div><div>trends rose,</div><div>although they</div><div>are still lower</div><div>than others.</div><div>RSS added</div><div>
</div><div>503 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAH_satellite_temperature_dataset</div><div>504 B.D. Santer, T.M. Wigley, K.E. Taylor, “The Reproducibility of Observational</div><div>Estimates of Surface and Atmospheric Temperature Change,” Science 2 December</div><div>2011: Vol. 334 no. 6060 pp. 1232-1233 DOI: 10.1126/science.1216273.</div><div>www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6060/1232.abstract?sid=0e6e9d18-5b19-4406-</div><div>b99c-a43c1e35d770 (free registration)</div><div>505 “Satellite climate data at 33 years: questioning shaky claims that downplay</div><div>global warming,” www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weathergang/post/the-satellite-temperature-record-questioning-shaky-claims-after-33-</div><div>years/2011/12/20/gIQAd8KE7O_blog.html</div><div>Each change results from error fixes combined with additional data.</div><div>RSS shows errors </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>101</div><div>For more detail (than most readers need), Wikipedia continues: 506</div><div>“The UAH TLT dataset was a source of controversy in the 1990's as, at that</div><div>time, it showed little increase in global mean temperature, at odds with surface</div><div>measurements. Since then a number of errors in the way the atmospheric</div><div>temperatures were derived from the raw radiance data have been discovered and</div><div>corrections made by Christy et al. at UAH.</div><div>The largest of these errors was demonstrated in a 1998 paper by Frank Wentz</div><div>and Matthias Schabel of RSS. In that paper they showed that the data needed to</div><div>be corrected for orbital decay of the MSU satellites. …, introducing a false</div><div>cooling trend.[9] Even after the correction for satellite decay UAH continued to</div><div>infer lower TLT temperatures than RSS based on the same raw data. For</div><div>example Mears et al. at RSS found 0.193 °C/decade for lower troposphere up to</div><div>July 2005, compared to +0.123 °C/decade found by UAH for the same period.</div><div>Much of the remaining disparity was resolved by the three papers in Science, 11</div><div>August 2005, which pointed out errors in the UAH 5.1 record and the radiosonde</div><div>record in the tropics. … an error in the diurnal correction that leads to the 40%</div><div>jump in Spencer and Christy's trend from version 5.1 to 5.2.”</div><div>3) The claim of 0.01C accuracy is silly. In successive versions,</div><div>individual monthly numbers have often changed by more. 507</div><div> One may</div><div>claim an accuracy of .01C, but that is irrelevant if the number is wrong.</div><div>4) Such graphs are guaranteed to mislead. The untrained eye detects</div><div>trends poorly amidst noisy data. How would people interpret the dark</div><div>horizontal line at 0.0? It might look like a trend line, but it is not.</div><div>Heartland’s message was clear: “no warming,” but it was wrong.</div><div>
</div><div>506 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAH_satellite_temperature_dataset</div><div>507 Compare v5.2 vs v5.3 Global NH and SH numbers for year 2000, month 1:</div><div>vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.2 -0.184, -0.54, -0.314</div><div>vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/tltglhmam_5.3 -0.229, -0.67, -0.392</div><div>Does that look like .01 accuracy? Many similar examples can be found.</div><div>UAH notes 7 Aug 2005 say:508</div><div>“An artifact of the diurnal correction applied to LT has been discovered by Carl</div><div>Mears and Frank Wentz (Remote Sensing Systems). We have applied a new</div><div>diurnal correction … and call the dataset v5.2. … The new global trend from</div><div>Dec 1978 to July 2005 is +0.123 C/decade, or +0.035 C/decade warmer than</div><div>v5.1.”</div><div>The +0.123C/decade trend was added in red.</div><div>509</div><div> Actually, UAH computed</div><div>trends every month and recorded them on the last line of the file, as for 5.3:</div><div> 2010 11 0.381 0.513 0.249 … 2010 November Global NH SH</div><div>DECADAL TREND= 0.142 0.205 0.078 … Global NH SH trends</div><div>Heartland just ignored them. Even with more errors to come, the low</div><div>UAH trend would have been positive after they fixed errors in 1999.510</div><div>
</div><div>5) Heartland and Singer routinely disparage ground stations, ignore</div><div>better satellite analyses and treat (error-prone) UAH as 100% truth.511</div><div>A fine recent paper512 used data on El</div><div>Ninos, volcanoes and solar variations to</div><div>remove much of the noise.513</div><div> The 1990s</div><div>UAH results differed strongly, to the point</div><div>of disbelief by others, but as errors were</div><div>fixed, they have mostly converged. For</div><div>most of its existence, the UAH results were</div><div>contradictory, but Singer and Heartland</div><div>depended on them, while ignoring the</div><div>(positive) UAH-computed trends.</div><div>UAH is still a bit low, and may still have bugs, but is far more consistent</div><div>with the warming results credible researchers have been getting all along.</div><div>Singer and Heartland seriously misled people for 12+ years, §C.4.</div><div>
</div><div>508 vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/readme.01Dec2011</div><div>The “artifact” was a serious programming bug in the UAH code.</div><div>509 It takes about 10 minutes to format data for Excel and use the SLOPE function.</div><div>510</div><div> vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/readme.01Dec2011, 13 July 1999.</div><div>511 They also claimed support from radiosonde balloons.</div><div>www.sciencemag.org/content/309/5740/1556.abstract?sid=5ab8b66b-6d98-4c93-</div><div>930c-f34f2012b7d6 Tricky sensor problems had caused spurious low readings.</div><div>512 Grant Foster and Stefan Rahmstorf, “Global temperature evolution 1979–</div><div>2010,” Env. Res. Letters Volume 6 . iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022</div><div>513 tamino.wordpress.com/2011/12/06/the-real-global-warming-signal</div><div>Graph from blog post. Much more detail is in the paper:</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>102</div><div>Y.2 Crichton is Right! Wrong.</div><div>This pulls together the long sequence of Crichton promotions.</div><div>Z.2005.02-1 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Crichton Strikes Devastating Blow to</div><div>Alarmists</div><div>“Top-selling novel contains hard science</div><div>exposing the folly of global warming alarmism.”</div><div>This began a long series in which Heartland</div><div>frequently514 promoted a fiction author and</div><div>screenwriter as having disproved mainstream</div><div>climate science. IRS-0E</div><div>If a TV actor who plays a doctor tells children it</div><div>is safe to smoke, does that make it safe?</div><div>“State of Fear ... is an entertaining tale of a philanthropist, a scientist, a lawyer,</div><div>and two remarkable women who discover a plot hatched by environmental</div><div>extremists to trigger environmental catastrophes that they will blame on global</div><div>warming.” IRS-3E</div><div>Following is Bast’s list of Crichton’s science claims,</div><div>annotated with: RC for RealClimate analysis515 or Meme-nn.</div><div>516</div><div>While Heartland often calls on fakexperts, Crichton has to have been</div><div>among the fakest, short of the fictional character that Bast quoted at the</div><div>end.</div><div>517</div><div> Crichton learned well-known false/misleading anti-science memes</div><div>from someone or something and then wove them into a sellable story.</div><div>Heartland then marketed him as an expert from 2005 to 2009, Fig. W.4.1.</div><div>
</div><div>514 Figure X.3.1 shows 8 articles involving Crichton and 20 half-page “Crichton is</div><div>Right!” advertisements through January 2009.</div><div>515 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/michael-crichtons-state-ofconfusion</div><div>See also, Chris Mooney, Checking Crichton’s Footnotes, Feb 6, 2005</div><div>www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/02/06/checking_crichtons_footn</div><div>otes and scienceprogress.org/2008/11/the-crichton-effect/</div><div>516 www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php, §0.5.</div><div>517 By Bast’s logic, “everyone knows the moon is made of cheese,” says Wallace</div><div>to Gromit, in A Grand Day Out.</div><div>Crichton on Global Warming IRS-2E, IRS-3E, IRS-4E</div><div>“How much of the science in State of Fear is accurate, and how much</div><div>is fiction?518 Here is a summary of the scientific claims about global warming</div><div>that appear in the book.”</div><div>“most of the warming in the past century occurred before 1940, before CO2</div><div>emissions could have been a major factor (p. 84);”</div><div>False or misleading: Meme-35 The year 1940 was chosen carefully, but</div><div>more warming occurred since then, even with increased cooling aerosols.</div><div>519CO2 was already a major factor, along with the Sun, but the Sun has</div><div>changed little in last 30 years. The footnote applies to the next, as well.</div><div>“* global temperatures fell between 1940 and 1970 even as CO2 levels increased</div><div>(p. 86);”</div><div>Misleading: RC. This is generally attributed to increased industrial aerosols</div><div>plus some internal variability, and the major “bucket corrections” had not</div><div>yet occurred. 520</div><div>“temperature readings from reporting stations outside the United States are</div><div>poorly maintained and staffed and probably inaccurate; those in the United</div><div>States, which are probably more accurate, show little or no warming trend (pp.</div><div>88-89);”</div><div>False: ~Meme-05. USA is good, many others are good or at least adequate.</div><div>Most show warming, including USA, unless one cherry-picks the years.</div><div>“full professors from MIT, Harvard, Columbia, Duke, Virginia, Colorado, UC</div><div>Berkeley, and other prestigious schools, ... the former president of the National</div><div>Academy of Sciences ... will argue that global warming is at best unproven, and</div><div>at worst pure fantasy” (p. 90);”</div><div>True, but very misleading: There are always a few contrarians, including</div><div>one great statistician who would not accept smoking-cancer link. The</div><div>former president of the National Academy was Frederick Seitz, whom even</div><div>Philip Morris deemed “not sufficiently rational to offer advice” in 1989.</div><div>“temperature sensors on satellites report much less warming in the upper</div><div>atmosphere (which the theory of global warming predicts should warm first)</div><div>than is reported by temperature sensors on the ground (p. 99);”</div><div>False and incompetent: Meme-38 In 2005, the erroneous UAH numbers</div><div>for the lower atmosphere (troposphere) already showed warming, if less</div><div>
</div><div>518 Not much is accurate, most is fiction.</div><div>519tamino.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/antrhopogenic-global-cooling (that is URL)</div><div>520 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/06/of-buckets-and-blogs </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>103</div><div>than the ground stations. The upper atmosphere (stratosphere) has cooled,</div><div>as theory has long predicted. §Y.1</div><div>“data from weather balloons agree with the satellites (p. 100);”</div><div>True, but wrong: Meme-38 The balloons agreed with erroneous UAH</div><div>results, but from issues that when resolved, fit RSS better, not UAH. §Y.1</div><div>“Antarctica “as a whole is getting colder, and the ice is getting thicker” (p. 193,</div><div>sources listed on p. 194);”</div><div>Misleading/false or uncertain. Meme-10, RC, Wikipedia521</div><div>‘the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is “a huge group of</div><div>bureaucrats, and scientists under the thumb of bureaucrats,” and its 1995 report</div><div>was revised “after the scientists themselves had gone home” (pp. 245-246);’</div><div>Misleading/false. The UN IPCC staff itself is tiny. Volunteer scientists do</div><div>the main reports and draft the Summary for Policy Makers. Any</div><div>government representative can veto any word of the SPM, 522 so SPMs are</div><div>more conservative than the main reports written only by scientists.</div><div>‘* James Hansen’s predictions of global warming during a Congressional</div><div>committee hearing in 1988, which launched the global warming scare, were</div><div>wrong by 300 percent (.35 degrees Celsius over the next 10 years versus the</div><div>actual increase of .11 degrees); in 1998, Hansen said long-term predictions of</div><div>climate are impossible (pp. 246-247);’</div><div>False: Meme-89, RC; part of this claim comes from Pat Michaels having</div><div>distorted Hansen’s graph, a habit for him. 523</div><div>‘there has been no increase in extreme weather events (such as floods,</div><div>tornadoes, and droughts) over the past century or in the past 15 years; computer</div><div>models used to forecast climate change do not predict more extreme weather (pp.</div><div>362, 425-426);’</div><div>Misleading/False: (strawman): Meme-41</div><div>‘temperature readings taken by terrestrial reporting stations are rising because</div><div>they are increasingly surrounded by roads and buildings which hold heat, the</div><div>“urban heat island” effect (pp. 368-369); methods used to control for this effect</div><div>have failed to reduce temperatures enough to offset it (pp. 369-376);’</div><div>
</div><div>521 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctica_cooling_controversy</div><div>522 Steven H. Schneider, Science as a Contact Sport, 2009, Chapter 5.</div><div>523 www.skepticalscience.com/patrick-michaels-serial-deleter-of-inconvenientdata.html</div><div>Dana Nuccitelli</div><div>False: Meme-20, RC. UHI is real, but the methods work fine.</div><div>‘changes in land use and urbanization may contribute more to changes in the</div><div>average ground temperature than “global warming” caused by human emissions</div><div>(pp. 383, 388);’</div><div>False: Meme-72, RC. N. Canada, Arctic, W.Antarctic warming strongly.</div><div>‘carbon dioxide has increased a mere 60 parts per million since 1957, a tiny</div><div>change in the composition of the atmosphere (p. 387);’</div><div>Misleading: Meme-29. This sounds small, but 315?375 is nontrivial,</div><div>unless one ignores physics. A 10ppm drop likely helped LIA happen.</div><div>‘increased levels of CO2 act as a fertilizer, promoting plant growth and</div><div>contributing to the shrinking of the Sahara desert (p. 421);’</div><div>Misleading: Meme-120. This ignores Liebig’s Law of the Minimum.</div><div>Changes in rainfall patterns are far more relevant and models predict this.</div><div>‘sea levels have been rising at the rate of 10 to 20 centimeters (four to eight</div><div>inches) per hundred years for the past 6,000 years (p. 424);’</div><div>False: Meme-23.</div><div>‘the Kyoto Protocol, if successful, would reduce temperatures by only 0.04</div><div>degrees Celsius in the year 2100 (p. 478);’</div><div>Misleading: RC (Wigley comment)</div><div>‘change, not stability, is the defining characteristic of the global climate, with</div><div>naturally occurring events (such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and</div><div>tsunamis) much more likely to affect climate than anything humans do (p. 563);</div><div>Misleading/false/incompetent: Meme-02 Earthquakes and tsunamis are</div><div>silly claims. Volcanoes affect climate temporarily and their effects are</div><div>well-understood, as seen in good predictions following Pinatubo eruption.</div><div>‘computer simulations are not real-world data and cannot be relied on to</div><div>produce reliable forecasts (p. 566).’</div><div>Misleading/false: Meme-05</div><div>Crichton backs up many of these assertions by presenting the scientific data</div><div>and/or by providing Web links and references to the scientific journals that</div><div>document the facts.</div><div>As one character in State of Fear summarizes, “The threat of global warming is</div><div>essentially nonexistent. Even if it were a real phenomenon, it would probably</div><div>result in a net benefit to most of the world” (p. 407)</div><div>This “science” could have been taken straight from E&CN.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>104</div><div>Z.2005.04-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>Science Verifies Crichton’s State of Fear Assertions524</div><div>Book’s citations pass factual background check IRS-2E, IRS-3E</div><div>“Michael Crichton’s new novel, State of Fear, has created a whirlwind of</div><div>controversy as global warming alarmists try frantically to discredit the author’s</div><div>tenacious assault on global warming theory. Before State of Fear, the leftleaning</div><div>editorial hierarchy of major national media outlets successfully weeded</div><div>out the scientific skepticism toward alarmist global warming theory before</div><div>television and newspaper stories reached the general public. Crichton’s end-run</div><div>around censorship has created a maelstrom of wrath and fury from alarmists,</div><div>who realize the millions of citizens reading his novel will likely translate into</div><div>millions of newly converted skeptics of global warming alarmism.”</div><div>Z.2005.05-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Crichton’s State of Fear Lauded in Congress</div><div>“Best-selling novels are not often praised in Senate floor speeches. Of course, it</div><div>is not often that best-selling novels offer riveting discourse on important</div><div>scientific research and public policy matters. On January 4, Sen. James Inhofe</div><div>(R-OK) …” plus another half-page on p.13</div><div>2005.07-13 S.T. Karnick</div><div>Civilization and its Malcontents</div><div>Full page book review of Michael Crichton’s State of Fear.</div><div>Z.2006.10-14 Brian Bishop</div><div>Skeptics Debate Credibility of Environmentalists’ Claims</div><div>“During the debate, novelist and medical doctor Michael Crichton was asked</div><div>how much evidence would be necessary to end the debate about predictions of</div><div>catastrophic climate change.”</div><div>Z.2007.05-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Climate Realists Beat Alarmists in NY Debate525</div><div>“Realists” were Michael Crichton, Richard Lindzen, Philip</div><div>Stott.“Alarmists” were Brenda Ekwurzel (UCS), Gavin</div><div>Schmidt (NASA GISS), Richard Somerville (Scripps).</div><div>
</div><div>524 No, science did not.</div><div>525 Science is generally not settled by this kind of debate, as it is far easier to</div><div>generate doubt than create clarity. Schmidt wrote about it.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/adventures-on-the-east-side/</div><div>Z.2009.01-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>MICHAEL CRICHTON, 1942-2008 Common-Sense Environmentalist</div><div>‘“Crichton paid a high price in vitriolic professional and personal attacks for</div><div>writing a novel pointing out the flaws in alarmist global warming theory ...”’</div><div>526</div><div></div><div>Crichton was covered in the 8 articles above and 20 copies of the half-page</div><div>advertisement following. One way or another, Crichton was visible in 25</div><div>issues from 2005.02 to 2009.01. See Fig. W.4.1 for occurrences.</div><div>Z.2005.08-19 Heartland half-page</div><div>Crichton is RIGHT! IRS-0E</div><div>This ad ran a total of 20 times:</div><div>2005: 08, 10, 11, 12</div><div>2006: 01, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 10, 11, 12</div><div>2007: 03, 04, 05, 06</div><div>2008: 03, 04, 05</div><div>Crichton was mostly wrong or at best misleading, but knew how to tell an</div><div>sell a story, and Heartland marketed this fakexpert comprehensively. They</div><div>knew a good marketing pitch when they saw it.</div><div>One might wonder if was recruited, got help or did this all himself.527</div><div>
</div><div>526 He got invited to testify in Congress and probably made some money from the</div><div>book. Heartland certainly promoted it for him, with 20 half-page ads.</div><div>527 legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/aow83b00 Tobacco tried to recruit authors.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>105</div><div>Z. E&CN Excerpts and annotations</div><div>Z.2001 5 issues528</div><div>Z.2001.06</div><div>529</div><div>At this point, Editor was Diane Carol Bast, Managing Editors were Janet</div><div>Lehr and Jay H. Lehr, PhD. Roy Marden of PM was a Board member.</div><div>Z.2001.06-1 Banner subhead, through Z.2002.03</div><div>“The Monthly Newspaper for New-Era Environmentalists</div><div>Z.2001.06-1a GLOBAL TEMPERATURES</div><div>Is this global warming?</div><div>YES. Even Spencer and Christy’s still-erroneous work showed</div><div>warming trends. Every issue530 has a front-page tag and an</div><div>interior section. Misleading claims about satellites pervade</div><div>E&CN. Heartland, Singer and others quoted here relied on this,</div><div>it was wrong, and they had to know. They</div><div>ignored the UAH data that contradicted the</div><div>desired message. Meme-38 See §Y.1.</div><div>Z.2001.06-1b ?</div><div>Climate change impact on human health called ‘highly uncertain’</div><div>Z.2001.06-1c Diane Carol Bast</div><div>Whitman delays, alters Clinton arsenic standards</div><div>Z.2001.06-2 Fred Singer (That Was The Week That Was)</div><div>NEWS – NEWS – NEWS Compiled by SEPP</div><div>Z.2001.06-4 Paul Georgia</div><div>IPCC report criticized by one of its lead authors</div><div>“Politics, not science, drives the United Nations’ work on climate change,</div><div>warns Dr. Richard Lindzen, one of the world’s leading atmospheric physicists”</div><div>
</div><div>528heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10522.pdf Z.2001.05 not available. File I/O problem 01/03/12</div><div>529heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10523.pdf</div><div>530 Except Z.2004.09 for no obvious reason.</div><div>Z.2001.06-5 Dr. William Grierson531</div><div>Global temperature changes throughout history</div><div>Z.2001.06-6 (Reprinted from Washington Times, likely Singer)</div><div>Bush stands his ground on CO2</div><div>Z.2001.06-6a S. Fred Singer</div><div>Is Kyoto dead?</div><div>Z.2001.06-7 Brian Mannix532</div><div>Climate change policy could create the mother of all cartels</div><div>‘Bush has stood in the way of an army of diplomats and lobbyists whose</div><div>ambition is to create a “carbon cartel”’</div><div>‘“If the carbon cartel succeeds, it will cause direct economic damage on an</div><div>unprecedented scale. More frightening, however, is the collateral damage it</div><div>would inflict on our political institutions.”’</div><div>Z.2001.06-10 Glenn R. Schleede</div><div>There’s too little power in wind</div><div>‘Wisconsin study finds “wind farms” cannot make a significant contribution to</div><div>the state’s electricity supply or to pollution reduction’</div><div>Z.2001.06-16 John Fulton Lewis</div><div>ELF criminals go unpunished533</div><div>Z.2001.06-18 Jay Lehr</div><div>The real story behind Europe’s support of Kyoto</div><div>‘It was never about science. It was always about bringing the U.S. to its</div><div>knees’</div><div>
</div><div>531 “A retired University of Florida agricultural scientist, Dr. William Grierson</div><div>likes to apply his knowledge of science to his lifetime interest in history and</div><div>archaeology.” 1917-2011: www.tributes.com/show/William-Grierson-92313081</div><div>532 “Brian Mannix is director of science and technology at the Manufacturers</div><div>Alliance, an industry- supported think tank in Arlington, Virginia.”</div><div>533 Serious environmentalists have nothing to do with ELF, but E&CN often tries</div><div>to conflate the real extremes and moderates, who often work with industry.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>106</div><div>Z.2001.07</div><div>534</div><div> not available</div><div>Z.2001.08535</div><div>Diane Carol Bast was Editor, James M. Taylor became Managing Editor.</div><div>Z.2001.08-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Global warming science uncertain536</div><div>“National Academy of Sciences finds evidence of warming,</div><div>but no link to human activity”</div><div>“Major uncertainties exist as to whether human activity has caused any warming</div><div>of the planet, concluded a much-anticipated study conducted by the National</div><div>Academy of Sciences (NAS). … IRS-2E</div><div>Alarmists claim study supports them …</div><div>Quotes: Richard Lindzen, Steve Milloy (Adjunct CATO,</div><div>junkscience.com), Paul Georgia (CEI), Myron Ebell (CEI), Joseph Bast.</div><div>Z.2001.08-3 James Taylor</div><div>EPA panel pushes tough new dioxin rules</div><div>Proposal is based on one badly flawed study that hasn’t been verified</div><div>by independent researchers537</div><div>Quotes: Steve Milloy (CATO adjunct), Michael Gough (CATO).</div><div>Z.2001.08-6 James Johnston</div><div>Motor vehicle mileage rules: Making matters worse</div><div>“Of course, the climate has always changed and always will. Ice caps have</div><div>oscillated over much of the Earth’s surface for millions of years, and scientists</div><div>say we are in an interglacial period— meaning they expect the ice to come again.</div><div>While there are theories about why these drastic changes have taken place, there</div><div>is no consensus among scientists about the causes.”</div><div>Is there any reason to believe Johnston has even the slightest competence</div><div>in climate science?</div><div>
</div><div>534heartland.org/newspaper/july-2001-environment-climate-news No PDF.</div><div>535heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10528.pdf</div><div>536 As usual, neither Taylor nor Singer link to the actual report, which is:</div><div>www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10139</div><div>537 Maybe so, but read carefully: www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs225/en</div><div>www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11688</div><div>Z.2001.08-7 James Taylor</div><div>Bush upholds Clinton air particle rules</div><div>But science casts doubt on need for tightened standards</div><div>Quotes: Kay Jones and Ben Lieberman (CEI).</div><div>Z.2001.08-9 S. Fred Singer</div><div>NAS summary distorted</div><div>‘The very first sentence of the Summary to the National Academy of Sciences’</div><div>recently issued report on global climate change (NAS/S) makes clear that the</div><div>politics of climate change continues to take precedence over the science of</div><div>climate change, even among scientists. That sentence states unambiguously:</div><div>“Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth’s atmosphere as a result of human</div><div>activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to</div><div>rise.” Only near the end of the report itself (page 17 of 24 pages) do we learn of</div><div>the considerable uncertainties that could offset the</div><div>clear and unequivocally stated conclusion of the first paragraph:</div><div>“Because of the large and still uncertain level of natural variability inherent in</div><div>the climate record and the uncertainties in the time histories of the various</div><div>forcing agents (and particularly aerosols), a causal linkage between the buildup</div><div>of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and the observed climate changes during</div><div>the 20th century cannot be unequivocally established.538The fact that the</div><div>magnitude of the observed warming is large in comparison to natural variability</div><div>as simulated in climate models is suggestive of such a linkage, but it does not</div><div>constitute proof of one because the model simulations could be deficient in</div><div>natural variability on the decadal to century time scale. …</div><div>The NAS/S sidesteps the fact the atmosphere has not been warming since 1979</div><div>(according to satellite data):…539</div><div> Meme-38</div><div>Concluding thoughts</div><div>The NAS report stands or falls principally on whether the climate warmed in the</div><div>past 50 years, and especially since 1980. Meme-36 The overwhelming bulk of</div><div>data from different independent sources shows no such warming trend.</div><div>540 We are</div><div>not talking just about science, but about evidence.’ IRS-2E</div><div>
</div><div>538 For scientists, “unequivocal” requires certainty, and even a 99% chance is not</div><div>unequivocal. See MOO2005, Chapter 7 on this whole topic.</div><div>539 That was already clear untruth in 2001, §Y.1.</div><div>540 That was also a clear untruth in 2001.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>107</div><div>Z.2001.08-14 Interview with Jerry Taylor by James Taylor</div><div>Free-market541 environmentalism: It’s about choice, not science542</div><div>“ECN: If you were to recommend a short list of books, journals, articles, or Web</div><div>sites on free market environmentalism, what would be on that list?</div><div>TAYLOR: The best Web site for information about junk science surrounding</div><div>environmental issues is Steve Milloy’s junkscience.com. The best Web site to</div><div>keep up with the scientific fight over global warming is Pat Michaels’</div><div>greeningearthsociety.org. Heartland’s Web site (heartland. org) is probably the</div><div>best one-stop shop for links to policy analyses on environment- related topics.</div><div>Cato’s natural resource studies pages (cato.org) aren’t too shabby either!</div><div> Good books on environmental issues are legion. For the best book on the</div><div>nonsense surrounding the global warming issue, check out The Satanic Gases by</div><div>Pat Michaels and Robert Balling. For the best book on the issues surrounding air</div><div>pollution, I recommend Indur Goklany’s Clearing the Air.</div><div> For environmental policy in general, I’d recommend Terry Anderson’s Free</div><div>Market Environmentalism and Wilfred Beckerman’s Through Green Colored</div><div>Glasses. For public lands-related issues, I like Karl Hess’ book Visions Upon the</div><div>Land.</div><div> For generalized critiques of junk science, see anything by Steve Milloy and</div><div>Michael Fumento. For a good book on how environmental and resource</div><div>apocalypse is not upon us, the absolute best book is Julian Simon’s The State of</div><div>Humanity.”</div><div>
</div><div>541 People who spent decades in Silicon Valley business, in the intensely</div><div>competitive free markets of technology, tend not to listen much to people who’ve</div><div>spent their careers in think tanks telling us how it should be done, especially when</div><div>much of their effort goes to retarding better technology in defense of a few wellestablished</div><div>businesses.</div><div>542 Yes, it certainly has nothing to do with science as practiced by real scientists.</div><div>Z.2001.09543</div><div>Z.2001.09-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Bonn delegation passes “Kyoto lite”</div><div>“U.S. still opposed: Supporting science is suspect, flaws remain”</div><div>“Global warming the Rosetta stone544 of anti-technology movement”</div><div>“So, what’s the catch? The catch is global warming is the Rosetta stone of the</div><div>anti-West, anti-technology, anti-globalization movement.545 …</div><div>For as long as global warming is seen as a serious problem whose solution</div><div>mandates the curtailment of industrial activity, the anti-West, anti-technology,</div><div>anti-globalization movement has a meal ticket for its ulterior motives.”</div><div>Z.2001.09-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>House subcommittee approves tighter fuel economy mandates</div><div>“In a blow to large families and vehicle safety proponents, the House Energy and</div><div>Air Quality Subcommittee voted 29-3 on July 12 to increase Corporate Average</div><div>Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for light trucks (including sport utility</div><div>vehicles, mini-vans, and pickup trucks).”</div><div>Z.2001.09-13 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>“Precautionary Principle” is at odds with science546</div><div>
</div><div>543heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10530pdf</div><div>544 Rosetta stone? What? Touchstone, maybe.</div><div>545 Silicon Valley is strongly concerned with AGW and it has none of those.</div><div>Has Taylor ever contributed the slightest thing to the technology he uses?</div><div>546 Good scientists are irked when Precautionary Principle gets over-applied, as</div><div>certainly happens.</div><div>Many risk assessment issues are legitimately arguable, but does the reader take</div><div>seriously such discussions in E&CN, which defends tobacco and pervasively</div><div>downplays any harm in coal, mercury, asbestos, dioxins? Bonner Cohen was</div><div>closely involved in TASSC, funded by cigarette-maker PM.</div><div>Would anyone trust their children to his opinions?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>108</div><div>Z.2001.10547</div><div>Z.2001.10-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Bush energy plan clears first hurdle</div><div>“President prevails on ANWR, CAFÉ”</div><div>2001.10-2 James M. Taylor</div><div>Congress preempts EPA in mandating new arsenic standards</div><div>“Arsenic, a naturally occurring substance, is the 20th most common element in</div><div>the Earth’s crust and the 12th most common element in the human body. Most</div><div>of the arsenic found in water supplies has entered the water through natural</div><div>processes.”548</div><div>Z.2001.10-3 Gerhard Stohrer549</div><div>Why the arsenic standard should not be changed</div><div>Z.2001.10-2 James M. Taylor</div><div>Polar ice cap studies refute global warming</div><div>‘A series of recent studies shows that the polar ice caps, which should be</div><div>shrinking if dire global warming theories are correct, are maintaining their mass</div><div>and in fact growing slightly. The studies suggest satellite temperature readings,</div><div>which indicate no global warming of the lower atmosphere, are more reliable</div><div>than surface temperature readings, taken by humans under varying conditions,</div><div>that had indicated a slow, gradual warming. Meme-38</div><div> A study published in the December 3, 1999 issue of Science magazine,</div><div>authored by Ola Johannessen, Elena Shalena, and Martin Miles, reported Arctic</div><div>sea ice had declined by 14 percent from 1978 through 1998.In a related story,</div><div>columnist Richard Kerr pondered “Will the Arctic Ocean lose all its ice?” The</div><div>mainstream press ran with the story, giving dire warnings that global warming</div><div>was upon us.</div><div>
</div><div>547heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10532.pdf</div><div>548 Yes, most is natural, but levels previously deemed safe sometimes change with</div><div>new research.</div><div> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arsenic_contamination_of_groundwater</div><div>549 “Gerhard Stohrer is president of the Larchmont, New York-based Risk Policy</div><div>Center. The Center is motivated by its members’ sense of civic duty to end the</div><div>routine use of junk science in regulation.”</div><div> However, CO2 Science Magazine, a publication of The Center for the Study of</div><div>Carbon Dioxide and Global Change550, later noted that in the Johannessen study,</div><div>“essentially all of the drop ...occurs rather abruptly over a single period of not</div><div>more than three years (87/88-90/91) and possibly only one year (89/90-90/91).</div><div>Furthermore, it could be argued from their data that from 1990/91 onward, sea</div><div>ice area in the Arctic may have actually increased.” Meme-60</div><div> More recent studies of the polar ice caps verify CO2 Science Magazine’s</div><div>skepticism, and show the polar ice caps are holding their own and actually</div><div>growing slightly..’</div><div>Z.2001.10-11 Michael D. Mallinger551</div><div>Regulating CO2 as a pollutant: Costly in more ways than one</div><div>Z.2001.10-12 S. Fred Singer</div><div>News from the month that was . . .</div><div>Z.2001.10-15 Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Looking for an outstanding speaker? (Jay Lehr)</div><div>“Who is Dr. Jay Lehr?</div><div>Dr. Jay Lehr is an internationally renowned motivational speaker,</div><div>scientist, and author. He is considered the world’s leading</div><div>authority on groundwater hydrology.</div><div>552 Dr. Lehr is currently</div><div>Senior Scientist with Environmental Education Enterprises and</div><div>Science Director for The Heartland Institute, a nonprofit think</div><div>tank based in Chicago, Illinois." This ad appears pervasively.</div><div>
</div><div>550 CSCDGC’s role here seems to be to cherry-pick science papers for any</div><div>elements that emphasize positive effects of CO2 or minimize negative ones.</div><div>551 “Michael D. Mallinger is a research associate at the Competitive</div><div>Enterprise Institute in Washington, DC” I found:</div><div>cei.org/other/michael-mallinger 01/03/12</div><div>“Mr. Mallinger graduated with high honors from George Mason University in</div><div>May 2000 with a BS in economics and a minor in business administration. His</div><div>research interests include law and economics, the economic way of thinking, and</div><div>the history of economic thought.” GMU connection appears again.</div><div>552 Heartland says so. There is room for doubt as to the currency of this. Do</div><div>actual hydrologists think this? The reader might find some and ask.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>109</div><div>Z.2001.10-16 Paul Driessen and Nick Nichols</div><div>Opinion: What ever happened to common sense?</div><div>“We send our military men and women off to the Middle East to be maimed and</div><div>killed by terrorists and Scud missiles, while protecting our interests in this vital</div><div>oil region. But we fret over drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife</div><div>Refuge…</div><div>Global whining</div><div>We worry about global warming because of attention-grabbing headlines and</div><div>computer generated worst-case scenarios—with virtually no actual evidence to</div><div>back it up. The global warming scare is clearly the most powerful weapon the</div><div>radicals have yet devised for their war against free enterprise, air conditioners,</div><div>cars, and the U.S. lifestyle.”</div><div>2001.10-20 Heartland ad, full-page, Nikki Saret</div><div>Dear Readers:</div><div>“During the past three months, nearly $5,000 has been contributed to The</div><div>Heartland Institute by Environment & Climate News readers responding to my</div><div>earlier appeal for your help.</div><div>Your generosity is greatly appreciated, and it helped produce this issue of</div><div>E&CN. It was not, I regret to say, enough to keep us from reducing the</div><div>circulation of this issue from the previous level of 45,000 copies to about 30,000.</div><div>Every state and national elected official in the U.S., environment reporters at</div><div>major newspapers, and people who have filled out subscription cards remain on</div><div>the complimentary mailing list.</div><div>Financial restraints were the main reason we reduced circulation, but not the</div><div>only reason. Our agreement to send three free issues to members of Citizens for</div><div>a Sound Economy has run its course, so we are looking for new lists of people</div><div>who might be interested in receiving the paper.”</div><div>Z.2001.12553</div><div>Z.2001.12-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>High-latitude studies refute global warming</div><div>Canadian, Russian data show current temperatures well within</div><div>normal range</div><div>“The first and most striking signs of human-induced global warming should be</div><div>evident at the higher polar latitudes, according to virtually all climate change</div><div>alarmists and the computer models they tout.</div><div> The latest round of high-latitude studies, however, shows polar temperatures</div><div>are comfortably within the normal range. The often-predicted global warming is</div><div>nowhere to be found.</div><div>Hudson Strait ice wedges</div><div>In a new study reported in The Holocene 11:563-577 (2001), Dr. J.N. Kasper and</div><div>Dr. M.Allard examined the growth and decay of ice wedges on the shore of</div><div>Hudson Strait in northern Quebec.</div><div> As described by the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change</div><div>(www.co2science.org), “Ice wedges are a widespread and abundant form of</div><div>ground ice in permafrost regions of the world that deform and crack the soil.</div><div>During colder periods, ice wedge activity is enhanced, while in warmer periods it</div><div>is minimized, thus providing a record of climate change.””</div><div>Z.2001.12-4 Frederick Seitz and Robert Jastrow554</div><div>Do people cause global warming?</div><div>“What the scientific evidence reveals”</div><div>“We find the scientific evidence clearly indicates the global warming in the last</div><div>100 years is likely not due mostly to human activities. …</div><div>Satellites and high altitude balloons have been monitoring the temperature of the</div><div>atmosphere throughout the 1980s and 1990s, and they show no warming trend.</div><div>The greenhouse ‘fingerprint’ is missing.”555 Meme-38</div><div>Quotes: Richard Lindzen (MIT).</div><div>
</div><div>553heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10533.pdf</div><div>554</div><div> ORE2010 covers these men in detail.</div><div>555 The balloons turned out to have problems, and the UAH satellite data they</div><div>relied on already showed warming, although less than it did later when yet more</div><div>errors were corrected. Seitz and Jastrow used their reputations to mislead, §Y.1</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>110</div><div>Z.2001.12-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Satellite data show CO2 creating a greener planet</div><div>‘“When the next dramatic warming period occurs—as it inevitably will at some</div><div>point—that will not in itself justify the global warming alarmism sure to follow.”</div><div>… Meme-38</div><div>“[T]he satellite data present a strong rebuttal to global warming alarmists’</div><div>predictions that dire consequences would follow any planetary warming.””</div><div>Z.2001.12-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Science debunks Glacier National Park warming, melting alarm</div><div>But are human beings really causing Glacier National Park’s famous alpine</div><div>glaciers to melt? While the sensationalists say “yes,” the science says “no.”556</div><div>Melting is nothing new</div><div>Patrick Michaels, professor of environmental sciences at the University of</div><div>Virginia and Cato Institute senior fellow .…</div><div>In 1895, according to Michaels, the glaciers “were melting then, too. …They</div><div>started to melt as the region emerged from what is sometimes called the ‘Little</div><div>Ice Age,’ a cold period that ended in the middle of the 19th century.” Meme-32</div><div>Quotes: Pat Michaels</div><div>Z.2001.12-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>Radical environmentalists side with terrorists following September 11</div><div>attacks</div><div>“The statements and actions of the radical environmentalists in the</div><div>wake of the September 11 attacks speak volumes about the ideology</div><div>and loyalties of the radical green movement.”</div><div>“Osama bin Laden has friends in the radical environmentalist movement.”</div><div>Z.2001.12-10 Nick Nichols</div><div>Let’s also battle home-grown terrorists</div><div>Z.2001.12-12 Paul K. Driessen</div><div>Defending and rebuilding America requires resources</div><div>‘“If we are to defend and rebuild America, we must have petroleum— and</div><div>metals, timber, coal, and nuclear energy, and a modernized energy distribution</div><div>system.”’</div><div>
</div><div>556 Michaels says no. Real scientists who work there describe the effects.</div><div>www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2007-10-11-glacierpark_N.htm</div><div>Z.2001.12-13 Alan Caruba</div><div>Greens undermine America’s military557</div><div>“Hundreds of government employees are little more than covert</div><div>agents for the environmental movement”</div><div>Z.2001.12-16 James Johnston</div><div>Nothing good in this old CAFÉ</div><div>“Jobs versus fuel economy mandates”</div><div>Z.2001.12-17 Fred Singer</div><div>Who needs higher energy taxes? IRS-2E, IRS-3E</div><div>“What are some of the common features of the Global Warming scare and other</div><div>widely spread popular beliefs, like astrology, UFOlogy, harmful effects from</div><div>low-level nuclear radiation and from electric transmission lines?</div><div>1. A tenuous scientific base. There certainly is an atmospheric greenhouse effect,</div><div>but is it significant?558 Meme-31</div><div>2. Selective use of empirical evidence by ignoring contrary data. Weather</div><div>satellites, balloon sondes, and a variety of proxy data show no current</div><div>warming.559</div><div> Meme-38</div><div>3. Misinterpreting other evidence. Deep ocean warming, shrinking of glaciers</div><div>and of Arctic ice cover, sea-level rise are all evidence of past—not of current—</div><div>warming.560</div><div>4. Adjusting theories to fit the preferred scenario. Bringing in adjustable</div><div>parameters like aerosols.561</div><div>5. Manipulating the media. Manufacturing disaster scenarios.562</div><div>6. Quasi-religious fervor. Faith-based acceptance of coming catastrophes.”</div><div>563</div><div>Actually, this well describes Singer’s own behavior, but the key message</div><div>was in the title “…taxes?”</div><div>
</div><div>557 US military is currently pursuing aggressive non-fossil-fuel energy and energy</div><div>efficiency approaches.</div><div>558 Yes. Casting doubt on the Greenhouse Effect needs rejecting modern physics.</div><div>559 The UAH satellite analyses were low, but even they already showed warming.</div><div>560 That is true, but irrelevant in any some cases, “past” means less than a decade.</div><div>561 Increased understanding is called scientific progress. Aerosols are not</div><div>adjustable parameters, just factors for which data is less available.</div><div>562 The media does this indeed, sometimes. Singer has spent 30 years claiming</div><div>there were no problems with acid rain, secondhand smoke, AGW, etc, which</div><div>might go rather far to the other extreme.</div><div>563 Faith-based disbelief in any environmental problems, and paid for it.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>111</div><div>Z.2002 10 issues</div><div>Z.2002.01564</div><div>Z.2002.01-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Whitman EPA adopts Clinton arsenic standard</div><div>Z.2002.01-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Radical greens step up eco-terror campaign after September 11</div><div>2002.01-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Economist warns against false market for CO2 control</div><div>“Attempting to make CO2 controls more palatable to the American public and</div><div>advocates of the country’s free-market economy, some global warming alarmists</div><div>are suggesting a “market-oriented” approach to reduce greenhouse gas</div><div>emissions. A recent study, however, suggests such approaches create only false</div><div>markets that are not much better than command and- control anti-CO2 schemes.</div><div>… In “What’s Wrong With Regulating Carbon Dioxide Emissions?” Canadian</div><div>economics professor Ross McKitrick examined various proposals for limiting</div><div>carbon dioxide emissions. The study formed the basis of a briefing, sponsored by</div><div>the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Cooler Heads Coalition565, that McKitrick</div><div>conducted for Congress.”</div><div>Quotes: Ross McKitrick, who was thus already connected with Heartland.</div><div>Z.2002.01-7 CATO Quarter-page ad</div><div>Debunk junk science and fear no more - – Junk Science Judo</div><div>“Scared by reports of risks to your health from food, consumer</div><div>products, and the environment?</div><div>Fear no more. This book, by science writer Steven J. Milloy, debunks</div><div>numerous health scares and scams, from silicon566 breast implants to</div><div>global warming.”</div><div>Some of these may well be junk science, but not global warming. Milloy</div><div>was the key person in PM/Exxon funded TASSC. This commonly-used</div><div>strategy seeks to conflate unwanted real science with silly pseudoscience to</div><div>use the latter to discredit the former.</div><div>
</div><div>564heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10534.pdf</div><div>565 CHC was a well-known front group managed by CEI.</div><div>566 Silicon Valley is not Silicone Valley. Breast implants use silicone.</div><div>Z.2002.01-8 Fred Singer/SEPP Half-page ad</div><div>The Science & Environmental Policy Project</div><div>“SEPP is an association of scientists and engineers567 concerned about the use of</div><div>sound science568 as the basis for environmental-policy decisions. With junk</div><div>science, such policies can waste billions of taxpayers’ dollars that can better be</div><div>spent on other societal problems. …</div><div> SEPP was founded in 1992 by atmospheric physicist S. Fred Singer, professor</div><div>emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia, former</div><div>director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, and former chief scientist of the</div><div>Department of Transportation. SEPP chairman is Dr. Frederick Seitz,</div><div>569president</div><div>emeritus of Rockefeller University and former president of the U.S. National</div><div>Academy of Sciences. The board includes distinguished scientists from many</div><div>countries.</div><div> All our scientists, officers, and board members work on a pro-bono basis and</div><div>do not receive salaries or fees. SEPP does not solicit support from either</div><div>government or industry570 but relies on private donations and occasional</div><div>foundation grants.</div><div>SEPP is a 501(c)(3) educational/research organization, incorporated in Virginia.</div><div>All contributions are tax deductible to the full extent of the law. Documentation</div><div>will be provided for donations of $250 and higher, or upon request.” IRS-0E</div><div>
</div><div>567 For most of its existence, SEPP has been mainly Fred Singer, with others</div><div>lending their names and working very little, A.1.</div><div>568 Thus, Singer’s newsletters and talks are “sound science,” whereas that done by</div><div>real climate scientists in peer-reviewed journals is “junk science. “</div><div>569 “Dr. Seitz is quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice.”</div><div>- Philip Morris staffer, 1989, tobaccodocuments.org/pm/2023266534.html</div><div>570 ExxonMobil has given “unsolicited $10,000,” and SEPP has gotten money</div><div>from Heartland and others, initial origins unknown. Heartland certainly got some</div><div>money from ExxonMobil and API. Some foundations are clearly fossil-related,</div><div>others are not.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>112</div><div>Z.2002.01-10 Jerry Taylor (CATO)</div><div>Economy, not national security, justifies ANWR drilling</div><div>Oil imports aren’t a problem, and energy independence is no</div><div>solution571</div><div>Z.2002.01-14 Fred S. Singer [sic]</div><div>Greener than you think</div><div>Former “Greenpeacer” vindicates economist Julian Simon</div><div>“A Danish former Greenpeace member572, Lomborg jauntily clings to his leftwing</div><div>academic credentials while exposing as hype virtually every environmental</div><div>gloom and doom scenario, and scary claim, of the last 25 years.”</div><div>Z.2002.01-14a S. Fred S. Singer [sic]</div><div>America, European Union take different approaches to chemicals</div><div>EPA report: Small doses of chloroform pose no cancer risk</div><div>Z.2002.01-15a Heartland ad, quarter-page</div><div>Global Warming or Global Greening?</div><div>“Man-made greenhouse gas emissions may, or may not, have a noticeable</div><div>impact on global climate during the coming century. Meme-31 But one thing is</div><div>for sure: rising levels of CO2, while harmless to humans, will boost plant</div><div>productivity by one-third or more!” Meme-120</div><div>www.climatesearch.com now redirects to:</div><div>www.climatewiki.org573</div><div> This is registered to Heartland.</div><div>Diane Bast is Administrative and Technical Contact.</div><div>
</div><div>571 There are many legitimate arguments about trade. Perhaps the reader might</div><div>find it curious that the same people denigrate a) energy efficiency, b) worrying</div><div>about dependence on foreign oil and c) restrictions on drilling in US.</div><div>Does anyone else have that exact combination of views? George Shultz does not.</div><div>The US military does not. What would oil companies like ExxonMobil think?</div><div>572 He claimed this, but Greenpeace had no records of him being such.</div><div> www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bjorn_Lomborg</div><div>573 who.godaddy.com/whois.aspx?domain=climatewiki.org&prog_id=GoDaddy</div><div>Z.2002.01-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>Hard evidence of global warming ... in Caddyshack?</div><div>‘“Raphael Sagarin, a “marine biologist” at Stanford University (Managing</div><div>Editor’s note: The somewhat goofy, pimply-faced kid who comes to my house</div><div>once a month to clean my saltwater aquarium also calls himself a “marine</div><div>biologist,” for what that’s worth.</div><div>574</div><div>,apparently learned of the contest while</div><div>visiting Alaska last year. …575</div><div>
</div><div>John Daly, author of The Greenhouse Trap and master of the fantastic Web site</div><div>“Still Waiting for the Greenhouse” ( www.john-daly.com), 576…’</div><div>Z.2002.01-20 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Introductory Offer! Want more customers, sales, and profits?</div><div>“Then you need to advertise your service or product in the next issue of</div><div>Environment & Climate News!</div><div> Once you’ve had a chance to review our media kit, we’re confident you’ll agree</div><div>that Environment & Climate News is the perfect place to reach:</div><div>Landowners</div><div>Loggers</div><div>Environmentalists</div><div>Foresters</div><div>Farmers</div><div>Miners</div><div>Grassroots activists</div><div>Engineers</div><div>and more!!”</div><div>Elected officials are added later, by Z.2002.11-20.</div><div>
</div><div>574 Taylor, who has zero scientific credentials, seems to, denigrates people who do.</div><div>Taylor does good marketing to associate Sagarin with “goofy…” IRS-3E</div><div>Rafe Sagarin is an award-winning researcher.</div><div> www.environment.arizona.edu/rafe-sagarin</div><div> rafesagarin.com/marine-ecology; rafesagarin.com/cv</div><div> rafesagarin.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/cv-science-sagarin-8-11.pdf</div><div>575 This was about the Nenana Ice Classic.</div><div>576 Daly was a non-scientist whose website was an excellent resource for</div><div>practicing detection of cherry-picking. I read it for years, for practice.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>113</div><div>Z.2002.02577</div><div>Z.2002.02-1 Banner</div><div>CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND TAKE AIM AT SMOKERS</div><div>Z.2002.02-9 Fred Singer/SEPP Half-page ad, ~Z.2002.01-8</div><div>The Science & Environmental Policy Project</div><div>Z.2002.02-12 Dan Hankett578</div><div>California to change enforcement of second-hand smoke measure</div><div>Z.2002.02-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>Maryland county ridiculed for attempted smoking ban579</div><div>‘Measure “ripe for abuse,” based on speculative science’</div><div>’“Montgomery County might be a plausible asylum for the Taliban,” asserted the</div><div>American Spectator’s R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. “Once settled there, the Taliban</div><div>might also find Americans who share their phobia against kite flying and the</div><div>public playing of music. …We’ve become the laughingstock of the world,”</div><div>lamented Michael Subin, one of only two Councilmen who originally opposed</div><div>the bill. Subin further observed the law would have a disproportionate effect on</div><div>poor people.“If you live in a house on a two-acre lot, you are exempt from the</div><div>moral police, but not if you are unfortunate enough to live in a small townhome</div><div>or a apartment.”’</div><div>580</div><div>Quotes: R. Emmet Tyrell, Jr (American Spectator), Cal Thomas, Arthur</div><div>Spitzer (ACLU), Steve Milloy (CATO), Elizabeth Whalen (ACSH)</div><div>
</div><div>577heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10535.pdf</div><div>578 “Dan Hanket is Of Counsel in the Land Use, Environment & Energy</div><div>Department of the lawfirm Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP.</div><div>Hanket has worked extensively on various legal matters associated with federal</div><div>and state Superfund programs, including the negotiation of consent orders and</div><div>decrees, agency oversight cost demands, and cost allocations.”</div><div>579 Montgomery County by now has disallowed smoking in common areas:</div><div>rockville.wusa9.com/news/health/montgomery-county-approves-smoking-banmulti-family-residences/60972</div><div>Like many, the original law was misframed.</div><div>580 US smoking is now concentrated in the poor and less well-educated. For</div><div>cigarette companies, they are supremely crucial customers. §0.7.</div><div>Z.2002.02-13a Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Smoker’s Lounge581</div><div>“If you smoke . . . and even if you don’t but are concerned by the legal</div><div>abuses committed by the anti-smoker lobby . . . you’re always welcome</div><div>in The Heartland Institute’s Smokers’ Lounge!</div><div>? In defense of smokers</div><div>? Politics of tobacco</div><div>? Second-hand smoke</div><div>? Under-aged smokers</div><div>? Tobacco litigation</div><div>? Anti-tobacco movement</div><div>? Cost to society?</div><div>? Pro-smoker sites</div><div>? Smoking bans</div><div>? Links to tobacco nannies”</div><div>Tobacco companies have long tried to appeal to Libertarian views to</div><div>maintain their profits. Heartland helped.</div><div>Z.2002.02-14 CATO Quarter-page ad ~Z.2002.01-7</div><div>Debunk junk science and fear no more – Junk Science Judo</div><div>Z.2002.02-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>When proselytizing goes too far 582</div><div>Z.2002.02-20 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Where do elected officials get the information they need?</div><div>
</div><div>581 heartland.org/policy-documents/welcome-heartlands-smokers-lounge 2007</div><div>582 “Will... my daughter … tell me how ashamed she is to have me as a father?”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>114</div><div>Z.2002.03</div><div>583</div><div>Z.2002.03-1 Banner subhead</div><div>“The Monthly Newspaper For Common-Sense Environmentalists”</div><div>“New-Era” evolved to “Common-Sense,” and that tagline stuck.</div><div>Z.2002.03-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>New studies throw cold water on warming theory</div><div>“Two major new studies, as well as temperature readings from precise satellite</div><div>measurements, have produced strong new evidence the Earth is not warming.</div><div>The new information has sent global alarmists into confusion and has vindicated</div><div>prior studies long ignored by the mainstream media. …”</div><div>Satellites report a very average year Meme-38</div><div>Even as the Nature and Science studies were being released, data from precise</div><div>satellite readings of the Earth’s lower atmosphere showed the year 2001 was a</div><div>very average year for global temperatures.</div><div> In mid-December, the United Nations weather agency reported 2001 was the</div><div>second-warmest year since global records began being kept 140 years ago. The</div><div>news was trumpeted by the mainstream media as still further evidence of global</div><div>warming.</div><div> However, the temperature readings were collected from ground stations,</div><div>located in or near growing cities. The more cities grow around temperature</div><div>reading stations, the more the stations produce false warming data. Meme-20</div><div> The precise satellite data, collected from the entirety of the Earth’s lower</div><div>atmosphere, showed 2001 was only the 9th warmest (and also the 15th coolest)</div><div>year since satellite measurements began in the 1970s.Moreover, the 2001</div><div>readings confirmed prior satellite data indicating no appreciable warming has</div><div>occurred since the 1970s.”</div><div>584</div><div>Z.2002.03-7 Patrick Michaels</div><div>Skeptical Environmentalist savaged, vindicated585</div><div>“Radical environmentalists respond to threat to their government funding”</div><div>
</div><div>583heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10536.pdf</div><div>584 As usual, Taylor either does not understand short-term variability or does not</div><div>care, and is wrong again on satellites, §Y.1.</div><div>585 No.</div><div>Z.2002.03-15 Diane Bast, Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>E&CN is a tool … use it!</div><div>“• contact an advertiser, buy its product or service ... and be sure to</div><div>say you saw the ad in E&CN</div><div>• clip (or photocopy) an E&CN article and send it to your state</div><div>representative or Congressman with a personal note</div><div>• cite an E&CN article in a letter to the editor or article for your</div><div>local newspaper</div><div>• quote E&CN in testimony before a state or local government hearing, or during</div><div>a speech to your local service group</div><div>• discuss an E&CN article with your school-age child586 ... and his or her teacher</div><div>After you’ve used E&CN as a tool in your personal campaign for sound-science,</div><div>common-sense approaches to environment issues, please let us know!</div><div>Your story could encourage an advertiser to join our effort, or a grant-maker</div><div>to help finance our growing circulation. After you’ve used E&CN as a tool in</div><div>your personal campaign for sound-science common-sense approaches to</div><div>environment issues, please let us know!</div><div>Your story could encourage an advertiser to join our effort, or a grant-maker to</div><div>help finance our growing circulation.”</div><div>
</div><div>586 These are counted in the “children” education/ads category, §X.3.</div><div>As context, during 2002, E&CN ran 6 ads for “Smoker’s Lounge.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>115</div><div>Z.2002.04</div><div>587</div><div>Z.2002.04-4 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Bush’s greenhouse gas program creates unsettled future</div><div>Z.2002.04-6 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Global Climate Coalition disbands588</div><div>‘The Global Climate Coalition (GCC), a Washington-based group that once was</div><div>the dominant voice of U.S. industry on the climate change issue, has announced</div><div>its “deactivization.”</div><div> Formed in 1989,the organization questioned the extent of the alleged global</div><div>warming problem and opposed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which set mandatory</div><div>reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.</div><div>But in recent years, many major companies resigned from the group, shifting</div><div>their memberships to softer-line organizations such as the Pew Center on Global</div><div>Climate Change and the Business Council for Sustainable Energy. GCC became</div><div>a coalition of trade associations rather than companies.</div><div> In announcing its demise, GCC said it had “served its purpose by contributing</div><div>to a new national approach to global warming.” It noted the Bush administration</div><div>“soon will announce a climate policy that is expected to rely on new</div><div>technologies to reduce greenhouse emissions, a concept strongly supported by</div><div>the GCC.:’</div><div>Z.2002.04-7 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Clean Skies initiative raises many questions</div><div>Z.2002.04-7a Ben Lieberman</div><div>America using more energy with less pollution</div><div>‘No one is suggesting anything resembling a rollback of the Clean Air Act and</div><div>its many regulations already in force. But new measures cracking down on</div><div>power plants—especially regulations that may jeopardize reliability or result in</div><div>higher energy bills—should be carefully evaluated in light of the positive air</div><div>quality trends currently under way.”</div><div>
</div><div>587heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10537.pdf</div><div>588 MAS2010 p.61. This operated out of the National Association of</div><div>Manufacturers (NAM) offices through 1997.</div><div> www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Climate_Coalition</div><div>GCC sometimes published views opposite those of its own advisory scientists.</div><div>www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/science/earth/24deny.html?r=1</div><div>Z.2002.04-9 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Get Active! Become a grassroots activist for sound science589 and</div><div>freemarket environmentalism.</div><div>“People across the U.S. are coming together to form a new environmental</div><div>movement based on sound science and free markets. This movement consists of</div><div>hundreds of thousands of people just like you, who believe in common-sense</div><div>solutions, respect for property rights, and economic progress as well as a safe</div><div>and clean environment.</div><div>Public policies will change only when elected officials hear from thousands of</div><div>people who want change. It's up to you to speak out.</div><div>Starting today, you can write one letter a week to an elected official or your local</div><div>newspaper. Together, we can show there is public support for common-sense</div><div>environmentalism.</div><div>Write to your elected officials</div><div>Find out who your Senators, Congressman, state senator, and state representative</div><div>are by visiting www.getactive.atr.org, and then contact them by email, phone,</div><div>fax, or letter. Send an article from this issue of Environment & Climate News</div><div>along with your letter, or quote from one of the articles. Tell them you oppose</div><div>public policies based on junk science.</div><div>Share this information with friends, neighbors, and coworkers</div><div>Use the reply form on page 19 to give your friends and neighbors free</div><div>subscriptions to Environment & Climate News. Urge them to get active, too.</div><div>Join a state or local organization that shares your values</div><div>Visit Heartland's Web site at www.heartland.org and find the think tank or</div><div>advocacy group in your state that supports free-market ideas. Learn about their</div><div>work and become a member.</div><div>Contact your local media</div><div>Point out junk science and anti-market bias in letters to your daily newspaper.</div><div>Brief letters— just three or four sentences—that refer in the first sentence to an</div><div>article in a recent issue have the best chance of being published. They take only a</div><div>few minutes to write and submit!”</div><div>Z.2002.04-13 Jerry Flint</div><div>Guilt-free guzzling</div><div>“With fuel prices down we may get back to doing that and put the miracle cures,</div><div>like hybrids and hydrogen engines, back on the experimental track where they</div><div>belong.”</div><div>
</div><div>589 “Sound science” was invented by Philip Morris, TASSC.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>116</div><div>Z.2002.05</div><div>590</div><div>Z.2002.05-1a Paul J. Georgia</div><div>Ice shelf collapse triggers debate</div><div>“In February and March, an ice shelf known as the Larsen B ice shelf in the</div><div>Antarctic Peninsula collapsed, leading many to raise once again the specter of</div><div>global warming.</div><div> “The disintegration of the ice shelf—1,260 square miles in area and 650 feet</div><div>thick—was most alarming to some because of the extraordinary rapidity of the</div><div>collapse,” wrote the Washington Post on March 20.“The shelf is believed to</div><div>have existed for as long as 12,000 years before regional temperatures began to</div><div>rise, yet it disintegrated literally before scientists’eyes over a 35-day period that</div><div>began January 31.”</div><div>Extremists sound alarm</div><div>Although there is no evidence to link the event to global warming, the New York</div><div>Times could not help raising the issue …”</div><div>Z.2002.05-1 Kenneth Green and Joel Schwartz</div><div>Air pollution risk exaggerated</div><div>Z.2002.05-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA enforcer quits with a flourish, joins left-leaning activist group</div><div>Z.2002.05-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>U.N. study ends overpopulation fears</div><div>
</div><div>590heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10538.pdf</div><div>Z.2002.05-8 Adolf Giger591</div><div>Expect future global warming to be “minuscule”</div><div>“Finally, temperature measurements using thermometers on the surface of the</div><div>Earth indicate an increase of 0.5° C over the recent 23-year period, compared to</div><div>the 0.06° C obtained from satellite measurements. Meme-38 It is possible that</div><div>the surface thermometer measurements are real592,thus indicating a possibility</div><div>for global warming, but the true causes are not known and cannot be due to</div><div>carbon dioxide. It may also be the case that the thermometer data are inaccurate</div><div>due to non-uniform global data gathering, urban heat-island effects593</div><div>, Meme-20</div><div>differences in calibration, and general reliability problems.” Meme-06</div><div>Z.2002.05-8a John Daly594</div><div>Ice shelf break-up caused media circus</div><div>“The panic mongers, from CNN to the Australian Broadcasting Corp.(ABC), are</div><div>in full cry.”</div><div>Z.2002.05-13 Heartland quarter-page ad, ~Z.2002.03-8</div><div>Smoker’s Lounge</div><div>Same words, new format.</div><div>
</div><div>591 “Managing Editor’s note: The following letter to the editor, reprinted here with</div><div>permission, was submitted to the IEEE Spectrum (Forum) in response to</div><div>“Capturing Climate Change,” a review paper on global warming written by Tekla</div><div>S. Perry and published in the January 2002 issue. IEEE is the Institute of Electrical</div><div>and Electronics Engineers, INC. Giger is an IEEE fellow.”</div><div>I have worked with many EEs, and even very good ones (Giger was at Bell Labs)</div><div>often know little of climate science. www.nebowireless.com/company.html</div><div>I think he was born ~1927, so he would have been ~75 when writing this.</div><div> spectrum.ieee.org/energy/environment/capturing-climate-change was the article.</div><div>Giger’s article was submitted. I’m not sure it was published.</div><div>592 They were real, the UAH satellites were wrong.</div><div>593 NASA had long corrected for UHI.</div><div>594 “John Daly is the author of The Greenhouse Trap (Bantam Books, 1989) and</div><div>many articles and papers in popular and professional publications. He hosts the</div><div>“Still Waiting for Greenhouse” Web site at www.john-daly.com.”</div><div>This was a fine site for practice in detecting cherry-picking.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>117</div><div>Z.2002.05-15 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Isn’t it time you joined a think tank?</div><div>“The Heartland Institute is a national nonprofit organization devoted to</div><div>informing elected officials and the public on important public policy issues. It</div><div>publishes Environment & Climate News, as well as monthly newspapers on</div><div>health care and school reform and other publications addressing a wide range of</div><div>topics.</div><div> We invite you to join the more than 1,300 individuals, foundations, and</div><div>corporations who want to make the world a better place. Have the satisfaction of</div><div>knowing you are working with others to restore the individual freedom and</div><div>limited government that made this country great.”</div><div>Did Joseph Bast’s defense of Joe Camel “make the world a better place?”</div><div>Does the “Smoker’s Lounge”? (in the same issue)</div><div>These appear in various forms, with a major change in Z.2004.08-</div><div>Z.2005.05.</div><div>Z.2002.05-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>Local issues take center stage in environmental debates</div><div>“Even debates on national issues are ultimately being decided at the local level.</div><div>The state of California, for example, has taken it upon itself to implement costly</div><div>and unrealistic fuel efficiency standards for SUVs. Regardless of the outcome of</div><div>the national fuel economy debate, automakers and auto workers across the</div><div>country will be deeply hurt by the new California standards.”</div><div>Heartland typically supports state and local rights over Federal …</div><div>except for California, of which little good is ever said in E&CN.</div><div>After some years of neglect, over the last decade or so, American</div><div>automakers have been creating local R&D offices in Silicon Valley,</div><div>working with Stanford’s CARS research group, etc.</div><div>Z.2002.07</div><div>595</div><div>Z.2002.07-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Bush rejects EPA warming report</div><div>“The Environmental Protection Agency released in June a report on global</div><div>climate change that contradicts public statements on the subject made by</div><div>President George W. Bush. The agency’s report claims to have found evidence</div><div>that human activity is having a significant warming effect on the global climate.”</div><div>596</div><div>Z.2002.07-3 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Island nation may sue U.S. over global warming</div><div>Z.2002.07-5 NAM quarter-page ad</div><div>Why the NAM?597</div><div>Z.2002.07-6 Marlo Lewis, Jr</div><div>California could get its own CAFE</div><div>Z.2002.07-7 Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Visit ClimateSearch.com</div><div>“ClimateSearch.com is a free Internet portal</div><div>offering the best available research and commentary</div><div>on global climate change”</div><div>Does research imply science?598</div><div>
</div><div>595heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10539.pdf</div><div>596 The EPA actually studied the science.</div><div>597 The NAM has often funded climate anti-science front groups, like the GCC.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Association_of_Manufacturers</div><div>598 The reader can assess the research quality via the Internet Archive. Try CO2:</div><div> wayback.archive.org/web/20020915000000/ ClimateSearch.com</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>118</div><div>Z.2002.07-8 Jay Lehr, Phd</div><div>The car of the future</div><div>(Hint: It looks a lot like today’s cars and trucks.)</div><div>“In addition to hybrid cars, the advances in technology that may save fuel are</div><div>powered by fuel cells and electric batteries. The latter is a hopeless dream: The</div><div>advent of a light, quickly rechargeable, non-toxic super-power storage battery</div><div>will likely arrive in a dead heat with the much-sought-after perpetual motion</div><div>machine. …</div><div>The biggest problem with any effort to mandate improved fuel efficiency is the</div><div>one swept under the rug: Fuel-efficiency mandates kill people. …</div><div>As for energy independence, any decent economist can explain the costs and</div><div>benefits of importing foreign oil into our energetic economy.”599</div><div>Z.2002.07-9 Michael Heberling600</div><div>Energy answer is not “blowing in the wind”</div><div>Z.2002.07-15 James M. Taylor</div><div>Cost of asbestos junk science continues to mount</div><div>Z.2002.07-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>Is EPA ready for the truth about dioxin?601</div><div>
</div><div>599 I heard George Shultz speak Summer 2011 at Stanford CARS, introducing talks</div><div>on Chevy Volt and EN-Vs. He offered enthusiastic and well-informed views</div><div>contradicting these.</div><div>600 “Michael Heberling is president of the Baker College Center for Graduate</div><div>Studies in Flint, Michigan.”</div><div>601</div><div> cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/CFM/nceaQFind.cfm?keyword=Dioxin</div><div>Z.2002.08</div><div>602</div><div>Z.2002.08-4 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Americans believe in global warming ...</div><div>“A nationwide survey conducted by the</div><div>National Science Foundation concludes few</div><div>Americans understand the scientific process,</div><div>and many believe in pseudoscience and may</div><div>be quick to accept phony science reports.603</div><div> Most Americans believe global warming is a real and serious problem,604 and</div><div>are fairly evenly divided on issues such as cloning and genetic engineering.605</div><div>However, 60 percent believe some people possess psychic powers, 40 percent</div><div>believe in astrology, and 30 percent believe in UFOs.”</div><div>“CNN’s coverage of the story acknowledged some climate scientists sharply</div><div>disagree and argue the Earth has been in a long-term, natural cycle of rising</div><div>temperatures since the socalled “Little Ice Age” 500 years ago. Meme-32</div><div>Further, those scientists point out that many temperature- monitoring stations are</div><div>located in cities, where heat-absorbing buildings and pavement can give</div><div>misleadingly high temperature readings. Meme-20</div><div> CNN failed to report that both satellite and balloon data show no detectable</div><div>warming of the Earth’s atmosphere in the past 22 years. 606 Meme-38 The</div><div>preponderant evidence shows the warmest years occurred around 1940.”</div><div>607</div><div>.</div><div>Meme-34?</div><div>
</div><div>602heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10540.pdf</div><div>603 Yes, fake like the NIPCC.</div><div>604 The National Academy of Sciences, AAAS, AGU, etc say that.</div><div>605 Cloning and genetic engineering are bio-engineering techniques that societies</div><div>can choose to apply or not. Climate science is science. Politicians and the public</div><div>can reject the laws of physics if they wish, but that will not change them at all..</div><div>606 This was already wrong and Singer had to know it, but he kept saying it.</div><div>607 No. data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2002/</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>119</div><div>Z.2002.09</div><div>608</div><div>Z.2002.09-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>California tries to circumvent federal CAFE</div><div>“Legislature invites lawsuit over backdoor maneuver; car owners will</div><div>suffer”</div><div>Z.2002.08-1a Glenn Schleede</div><div>Wind farms no boon for Dakotans</div><div>Z.2002.09-1b GLOBAL TEMPERATURES ~§Y.1</div><div>Is this global warming?</div><div>Z.2002.09-4 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Disappearing frogs and out-of-control fires: Must be global warming!</div><div>Z.2002.09-15 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Will UK get towers of power... or a load of hot air?</div><div>Z.2002.09-17 Kenneth Green</div><div>“Pavley’s Ploy” may carjack motorist choice609</div><div>
</div><div>608heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10541.pdf</div><div>609 Actually, it did not.</div><div>Z.2002.10610</div><div>Z.2002.10-14 Heartland quarter page ad</div><div>We do much more than just publish this newspaper.</div><div>“More state legislators recognize and trust The Heartland Institute than any other</div><div>free-market think tank.* IRS-5L?</div><div>We send three monthly newspapers and a quarterly magazine to every state and</div><div>national elected official, plus tens of thousands of grassroots activists</div><div>nationwide.</div><div>We also operate PolicyBot, the Internet’s biggest on-line clearinghouse for</div><div>public policy research and commentary.</div><div>Telephone survey of state elected officials conducted in May 2002 by Wiegand</div><div>Victory Enterprises.”</div><div>
</div><div>610heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10542.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>120</div><div>Z.2002.11611</div><div>Z.2002.11-5 API half-page ad</div><div>Voluntary Actions by the Oil and Gas Industry to Address Climate</div><div>Change</div><div>Z.2002.11-6 Fred S. Singer</div><div>Global warming: A status report?</div><div>“First, their figure is a welcome reassurance that warming from increased</div><div>greenhouse gases (GHG) levels will unlikely ever pose a problem.</div><div>Since the existing increase in GH forcing has not produced a measurable</div><div>temperature rise of the atmosphere, Meme-36 contrary to model expectations,</div><div>Meme-05 it is highly unlikely that a future rise will exceed 1°C under any</div><div>reasonable projection of population and fossil-fuel use.”</div><div>Z.2002.11-13 Fred S. Singer</div><div>Solar woes shock Sacramento</div><div>Z.2002.11-13 Book Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Debunking the solar energy myth</div><div>“The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won’t Run the World by Howard C.</div><div>Hayden,</div><div>612 PhD Vales Lake Publishing, paperback,224 pages</div><div>Z.2002.11-14 Book Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>A page-turner on economics (!?)</div><div>“Why Energy Conservation Fails by Herbert Inhaber, PhD</div><div>Quorum Books,paperback,237 pages”</div><div>Z.2002.11-15 Heartland eighth-page ad</div><div>Do you smoke?</div><div>“The Heartland Institute is creating a list of smokers who believe</div><div>recent tax hikes and bans are unfair. People on the list will receive</div><div>our newsletter, Lawsuit Abuse Fortnightly, and perhaps</div><div>occasional smoking-related articles and messages.”</div><div>
</div><div>611heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/10654.pdf</div><div>612 MAS2009 pp.99-101. The one book of his I read was exceptionally poor.</div><div>Maybe this one is better. Lehr reviewed the earlier edition Z.2005.06-18.</div><div>Z.2002.11-20 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Want more customers, sales, and profits?</div><div>This resembles Z.2002.01-20, but adds elected officials. IRS-5L?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>121</div><div>Z.2003 9 issues</div><div>Z.2003.01613</div><div>Z.2003.01-1 Fred Singer</div><div>Soot May Be Major Greenhouse Factor, New Study Says</div><div>“Published in the September 27 issue of the journal Science,</div><div>614 the report—by</div><div>researchers from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies—suggests that by</div><div>absorbing sunlight and altering weather patterns, light-absorbing carbon-based</div><div>particles could have nearly as much impact on global warming as carbon</div><div>dioxide, a greenhouse gas long considered the primary culprit in global warming.</div><div>The soot particles are produced by older diesel engines, cooking fires, and other</div><div>sources. …</div><div>The Science report calls into question the accuracy of global climate change</div><div>models, which have not considered the effects of black carbon. …</div><div>Because such nations as China and India produce so much black carbon, a new</div><div>focus on this pollutant could shift control responsibility to the developing</div><div>nations.”</div><div>Some good scientists used models (often denigrated by E&CN) to explore</div><div>soot effects, especially in China and India and their research pointed to</div><div>improvements in the models. Climate scientists generally think soot</div><div>control a good idea, but this (famous) research certainly did not downplay</div><div>CO2.. Singer mostly quoted a Perspectives article by others, not the actual</div><div>research article. While E&CN dislikes pollution controls in US, Singer</div><div>seems happy for soot control to happen in India and China.</div><div>
</div><div>613heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/11318.pdf</div><div>614 As it often does, E&CN gives a vague reference to an article that few readers</div><div>would find and might have been paywalled. Singer does not mention the authors,</div><div>Surabi Menon, James Hansen, Larissa Nazarenko, Yunfeng Luo:</div><div>www.sciencemag.org/content/297/5590/2250</div><div>Since Hansen has been attacked incessantly in E&CN, it might have been awkward</div><div>to have mentioned his name here. Singer had to know who wrote this.</div><div>The Perspectives article was by William Chameides and Michael Bergin:</div><div> www.sciencemag.org/content/297/5590/2214.summary?sid=2606a9d0-4762-</div><div>4e24-9f18-a0b405698224 They say:</div><div>“The contribution of BC to global warming [HN5] may be substantial, perhaps</div><div>second only to that of CO2 (6, 7).”</div><div>www.pnas.org/content/97/18/9875.long is relevant.</div><div>Z.2003.01-3 Michael Gough615 and Jeff Kueter616</div><div>The Politicization of Science</div><div>Z.2003.01-3 George Marshall Institute half-page ad</div><div>Yes! I want to help the Marshall Institute promote impartial</div><div>science…617</div><div>“The George Marshall Institute encourages the use of sound science in making</div><div>public policy. Drawing on a distinguished network of scientists, the Institute</div><div>offers unbiased and scientifically-accurate assessments of the meaning of</div><div>scientific and technical advances for policy making…</div><div>Join us in supporting the integrity of science in the policy process.”</div><div>Z.2003.01-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Still No Consensus on Global Warming Science</div><div>“New studies suggest global warming is not taking place, Meme-70and that</div><div>rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are benefitting the planet’s vegetation and</div><div>animal life” Meme-120</div><div>“Debate continues on whether human-collected data at surface weather</div><div>stations, such as airports, is less reliable than satellite records. Meme-06</div><div>Surface weather station readings show an increase of about 0.12° Celsius</div><div>per decade, but urban growth frequently creates artificial heat islands that</div><div>interfere with these stations.” Meme-20</div><div>“There has been no overall warming of the lower atmosphere since the satellites</div><div>began taking measurements in 1979.” Meme-38</div><div>Z.2003.01-8 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Global Warming Is Not Responsible for This Drought</div><div>Z.2003.01-8a Matthew R. Edgar618</div><div>Don’t Get Burned by Solar Power</div><div>
</div><div>615 “Michael Gough is editor of The Alchemy of Policy Making: Political</div><div>Manipulation of Science.” He was a former director at CATO.</div><div>www.marshall.org/experts.php?id=84</div><div>616 Jeff Kueter is executive director of the George Marshall Institute.</div><div>ORE2010 demonstrated that GMI produced little science and much politicization.</div><div>617 Based on ORE2010 and parts of MAS2010, most of this advertisement is</div><div>untrue, unless one accepts that “sound science” is real science.</div><div>618 “Matthew R. Edgar is a research associate with the Golden, Colorado-based</div><div>Independence Institute.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>122</div><div>Z.2003.02</div><div>619</div><div>Z.2003.01-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>States Will Pay Too Much for “Early Action” on Global Warming</div><div>Z.2003.02-6 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Reports of More Icebergs Are Misleading</div><div>“Contrary to opinions held by some researchers,620 a new analysis of more than</div><div>20 years of historical data has found no evidence that the increasing number of</div><div>large icebergs off Antarctica’s coasts is a result of global warming trends. …</div><div>Referring to his current study, Long said, “This data set is not evidence of global</div><div>warming. Nor does it refute global warming.””</div><div>Z.2003.02-6 Jeff Kueter</div><div>New Thinking on Environmental Policy</div><div>Z.2003.02-17 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Backyard Trash-burning a Major Source of Dioxin</div><div>“A new publication by the Chlorine Chemistry Council,621 Backyard Trash</div><div>Burning: The Wrong Answer, warns of the increasingly significant contribution</div><div>of uncontrolled backyard trash-burning to pollutant levels. …</div><div>The CCC brochure also addresses the issue of PVC contribution in dioxin</div><div>pollution. Scientific experiments have shown the generation of dioxin in</div><div>backyard burning correlates best with variables related to combustion such as</div><div>temperature and carbon monoxide, not the presence of PVC. Eliminating PVC,</div><div>therefore, will not prevent dioxin formation as dioxins are commonly produced</div><div>in virtually any combustion environment.”</div><div>
</div><div>619heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/11460.pdf</div><div>620 It might have been helpful to have been more specific. This is a standard kind</div><div>of argument in science: is some observed effect statistically significant, or not?</div><div>The general goal seems to cause confusion and doubt in public.</div><div>621</div><div> www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chlorine_Chemistry_Council</div><div>This might even be true, but of course, the key comment is at the end: PVC is OK.</div><div>Z.2003.03</div><div>622</div><div>Z.2003.03-2 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Science Does Not Justify Ban on DDT623</div><div>“The history of the sorry decision to ban DDT starts with Rachel Carson and her</div><div>1962 book Silent Spring. That bestseller, distorting scientific data, galvanized the</div><div>environmental movement and led to extravagant claims of ecological damage by</div><div>the newly founded Environmental Defense Fund, long before EDF discovered</div><div>global warming was a better way to scare the public.”</div><div>Z.2003.03-13 S. Fred S. Singer</div><div>Reform of New Source Review Raises Concerns</div><div>Z.2003.03-5 William O’Keefe</div><div>Cap and Trade: The Moral Equivalent of Bamboozle</div><div>Z.2003.3-6 Book Review by Terry Francl624</div><div>Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics</div><div>of Global Warming by Christopher Essex and Ross McKitrick Key</div><div>Porter Books, November 2002 320 pages paperback</div><div>“Taken by Storm should be required reading for anyone—including the media</div><div>and especially politicians—who wishes either to discuss or to develop policy</div><div>concerning global warming.</div><div>The two authors are eminently qualified to address the topic.” IRS-2E</div><div>
</div><div>622heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/11634.pdf</div><div>623</div><div> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT</div><div>624 “Terry Francl is senior economist for the American Farm Bureau Federation.”</div><div>See MAS010 p.37 [ESS2002]. Francl’s review was weak and ill-informed,</div><div>parroting what Essex and McKitrick wrote. Of their eminent qualifications there</div><div>is room for doubt, as is there for Francl’s competence to review.</div><div>Will Francl some day apologize to farmers hurt by climate change.?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>123</div><div>Z.2003.05</div><div>625</div><div>Z.2003.05-1 Banner</div><div>BUSH ENERGY PLAN | CLIMATE CHANGE: IT’S THE SUN</div><div>Z.2003.05-1b James M. Taylor</div><div>Faulty Statistics Plague IPCC Report</div><div>This was based on letters by Ian Castles.626</div><div>Z.2003.05-1a Chicago Conservative Conference627</div><div>WINNING WITH IDEAS</div><div>Z.2003.05-09 James M. Taylor</div><div>Business Groups Support Voluntary GHG Reductions</div><div>Groups like API said good words.</div><div>Z.2003.05-10 Jay Lehr and Richard S. Bennett628</div><div>A Climate Change Primer: It’s the Sun! Meme-01</div><div>“The climate record over the past 100 years provides no support for the idea that</div><div>human activities, such as burning coal and oil for energy, caused the early</div><div>20th century global warming.”</div><div>“While critics have charged satellite readings are not accurate, they correspond</div><div>so closely to weather balloon observations that this argument has been discarded.</div><div>Meme-38 Then, critics complained the satellite readings did not</div><div>correct for orbital decay; that was easily corrected.” See §Y.1.</div><div>Z.2003.05-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>State AGs Sue EPA to Compel CO2 Regulation</div><div>“Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring gas necessary for life on Earth. Higher</div><div>levels of CO2 in the atmosphere have been shown to improve the growth of</div><div>flowers, vegetables, grasses, and trees. Meme-120 Scientists disagree as to</div><div>
</div><div>625heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/12106.pdf</div><div>626 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ian_Castles</div><div>627 Heartland always claims to be nonpartisan.</div><div>628 “Richard Bennett is president of The Society of Environmental Truth in Corpus</div><div>Christi, Texas.” That does not seem to exist any more, whatever it was.</div><div>whether CO2 emissions from industrial activities may be contributing to global</div><div>warming.”629</div><div>Z.2003.05-12 Book Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>New Book Series Encourages Critical Thinking in Youth</div><div>“Two free-market policy groups have collaborated to launch a new series of</div><div>books for young people, under the title Critical Thinking about Environmental</div><div>Issues.</div><div>Unlike many environmental books found in schools today, the first three works</div><div>in the Critical Thinking series— focusing on global warming, endangered</div><div>species, and pesticides—offer objective and balanced discussions in a very</div><div>readable format. … Jane Shaw’s brief treatise on global warming is excellent</div><div>because it gathers all the existing evidence for and against global warming and</div><div>evaluates it fairly. ... She exposes the failings of reports issued by the United</div><div>Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ... and quotes the</div><div>wealth of real scientific evidence produced by senior climate scientists Sally</div><div>Baliunas, Willie Soon, Patrick Michaels, Richard Lindzen, and Robert Balling,</div><div>to name a few.”</div><div>Z.2003.05-14 (no author, quotes Singer)</div><div>Experts React to Sustainable Washington Report</div><div>‘“Results from weather satellites—the only high-quality global data we have—</div><div>show no appreciable warming of the atmosphere. Meme-38 It is therefore</div><div>foolish to suggest economically damaging ‘solutions,’ like energy taxes or</div><div>rationing, if there isn’t even a problem.” …</div><div>S. Fred Singer, president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project</div><div>and an internationally recognized expert on energy, environment, and climate</div><div>change issues,630 disagrees.</div><div>“Scientific debate is growing,” emphasized Singer, “about whether there is any</div><div>noticeable contribution to climate change from human activities. In fact,</div><div>measurements from different sources disagree on whether there is any ongoing</div><div>warming at all.’</div><div>631</div><div> Meme-03</div><div>
</div><div>629 This is a common tactic. Vague “scientists” disagree, in the same way that</div><div>“scientists” managed disagree about harm from smoking, long after it was clear.</div><div>630 Would the AGU, US National Academy of Science or UK Royal Society agree</div><div>with the editor of E&CN regarding Singer? I doubt it.</div><div>631</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>124</div><div>Z.2003.06632</div><div> unavailable</div><div>Z.2003.07</div><div>633</div><div>Z.2003.07-1 Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas</div><div>Analysis Finds Our Climate Unremarkable</div><div>This was an infamously bad paper, led to mass resignations, only</div><div>published via “pal review.”634</div><div>Z.2003.07-1a Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Inhofe: Chemical Security Is “Top Priority”</div><div>Z.2003.07-10 Jay Lehr and Richard S. Bennett635</div><div>A Climate Change Primer: Computer Models & the Need For More</div><div>Research636 Meme-05</div><div>Z.2003.07-13 S. Fred Singer –see Z.2003.09-16, a repeat.</div><div>NCAR Report Based on Flawed Science</div><div>“A news release from the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)</div><div>claims a “New Look at Satellite Data Supports Global Warming Trend.” But the</div><div>NCAR result is based on the wishful thinking of well-known global warming</div><div>promoters, rather than on solid science. IRS-3E</div><div> The NCAR findings were published by the journal Science on May 1 at</div><div>www.sciencexpress.org.</div><div>637 The lead author is Benjamin Santer of Lawrence</div><div>Livermore National Laboratory. Santer became notorious for surreptitiously</div><div>altering the text638 of a crucial chapter in the 1995 United Nations’</div><div>
</div><div>632heartland.org/newspaper/june-2003-environment-climate-news no PDF</div><div>633heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/12413.pdf</div><div>634 www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-prefer-pal-review-over-peer-review-chris-defreitas-pat-michaels-and-their-pals-1997-2003</div><div>635 “Richard Bennett is president of The Society of Environmental Truth in Corpus</div><div>Christi, Texas.” That does not seem to exist any more, whatever it was.</div><div>636</div><div> This is the classic GMI “more research needed.” There was already enough,</div><div>and again they rely on the flawed UAH satellite trends as though truth, See §X.</div><div>637</div><div> www.sciencemag.org/content/300/5623/1280.abstract?sid=3300345c-7d4f-</div><div>413d-95b1-9cc403e5765e Santer, et al, including Mears and Wentz.</div><div>638 Singer lied about Santer. See ORE2010 pp.1-5. Singer and Frederick Seitz</div><div>(who was already “not rational” by 1989, according to Philip Morris) attacked</div><div>Santer. Most of this article was already wrong in 2003 and in hindsight was far</div><div>Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report on Climate Change</div><div>in order to make it conform to the politically inspired IPCC Summary for</div><div>Policymakers. IRS-3E</div><div>Competing Trends</div><div>The NCAR study is based on an analysis of weather satellite data by Frank</div><div>Wentz and his colleagues at Remote Sensing Systems (RSS). They proclaim a</div><div>warming trend of about 0.1° C per decade between 1979 and 1999. Those results</div><div>are at odds with previous analyses of the same satellite data by John Christy and</div><div>Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH), who found</div><div>virtually no warming over the 20-year period. Meme-38</div><div> Over the past 25 years, a series of instruments aboard 12 U.S. satellites has</div><div>provided a unique temperature record extending as high as the lower</div><div>stratosphere. Each sensor intercepts microwaves emitted by various parts of the</div><div>atmosphere, with the emissions increasing as temperatures rise. These data are</div><div>used to infer the temperature at key atmospheric layers. The absence of an</div><div>observed warming signal in satellite-derived atmospheric temperatures has stood</div><div>in contrast to a distinct warming trend in temperature readings at the Earth’s</div><div>surface. A 2000 report from the National Research Council concluded both</div><div>trends might be correct— the global atmosphere might be warming more quickly</div><div>near the ground than higher up. All theoretical climate models, however, predict</div><div>a higher rate of warming for the atmosphere than for the surface.</div><div> The RSS group found a warming trend of 0.16° F per decade in the layer</div><div>between about 1.5 and 7.5 miles high, compared to a trend of 0.02° F in the</div><div>previously published UAH analysis. Both estimates have a margin of error of</div><div>nearly 0.2° F (plus or minus). The RSS results would be a closer match with</div><div>surface warming, as well as with computer-model simulations, and are therefore</div><div>preferred by the NCAR group.639 Meme-38</div><div>New Study Flaws</div><div>But the RSS results are most likely not correct. Wentz presented the RSS</div><div>analysis of the satellite data on December 4 in Washington, DC at a panel</div><div>organized by the federal Climate Change Science Program. Christy, Santer, and I</div><div>were members of the panel and heard his presentation, but there was no time for</div><div>discussion of his startling results.</div><div>Wentz was kind enough to give me a copy of his full paper so I could study it. It</div><div>is a careful piece of work that must be taken seriously, but that does not make it</div><div>correct. I mailed him a number of comments, to which his coauthor, Carl Mears,</div><div>responded. I then suggested they perform some crucial tests on the internal</div><div>
</div><div>more wrong. Santer is a MacArthur Fellow and recently became a member of the</div><div>National Academy of Sciences for his climate work. Singer is neither. See §Y.1.</div><div>639 NCAR preferred RSS because UAH was wrong, as was proved later.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>125</div><div>consistency of their results. There has been no reply so far. I also received</div><div>comments from Christy discussing the weak points in the RSS work.</div><div>Independent atmosphere temperature data from radiosonde instruments carried</div><div>aloft in weather balloons do not support RSS but agree with the UAH result of a</div><div>negligible warming trend (which will become even smaller as the 1998 El Nino</div><div>warming is gradually washed out). Of course, the balloon data have problems of</div><div>their own that require correction.640</div><div> Meme-38</div><div> But the surface data at weather stations are subject to large corrections as well.</div><div>A most important one—and difficult to remove completely—is the wellknown</div><div>“urban heat island” effect. (See “Study Documents False Warming Trend,”</div><div>Environment & Climate News, June 2003.) The urban heat island effect is the</div><div>local heating produced over time by the expansion of housing, traffic, and energy</div><div>consumption in the vicinity of city-based weather stations. Meme-20</div><div> Finally, we have a large amount of noninstrument data from “proxies” for</div><div>thermometers. Such proxies include measurements of the widths of tree rings,</div><div>isotope data from ocean and lake sediments, ice cores and corals, etc. All of</div><div>these can be calibrated in terms of temperature. I have personally examined</div><div>many of these published results and have yet to find any that show a recent</div><div>warming. It is another strong piece of evidence in support of the conclusion that</div><div>the surface data from city-based weather stations are contaminated by local</div><div>heating effects and cannot be relied on to support global warming. Meme-20</div><div> If, as suspected, the RSS analysis is not correct,</div><div>641 then the NCAR study is</div><div>mostly hot air. As science journalist Ron Bailey points out: “Evidently, the</div><div>strategy being used by Santer et al. is that if their models don’t agree with the</div><div>data, then change the data.”642</div><div> IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2003.07-14 James M. Taylor</div><div>Asian Brown Cloud Contradicts, Confounds Global Warming</div><div>Theories643</div><div>“Indian644 scientist Veerabhadran Ramanathan won global acclaim in 1999 when</div><div>he discovered one of the largest, most deadly bodies of pollution</div><div>
</div><div>640 In fact, they did get corrected, and UAH was wrong again.</div><div>641 It was right, Singer was wrong, again and again. (Note no Italics.)</div><div>642 Ron Bailey is at Reason, yet another think tank that has regularly taken tobacco</div><div>money. He may not be a climate scientist, but he certainly has strong views.</div><div>reason.com/people/ronald-bailey/articles</div><div>643 It did not. As often occurs, E&CN gave vague references that would take much</div><div>work for the target audience to find.</div><div>644 Ramanathan is an American citizen of Indian origin. He has worked at</div><div>Scripps for decades: and he certainly thinks global warming is a serious problem:</div><div>ever observed.”</div><div>India and China need to work on this, but as usual, E&CN leaps at any</div><div>idea that implies AGW is their responsibility and USA need do nothing.</div><div>Z.2003.07-16 S. Fred Singer</div><div>EPA’s Particulate Matter Standard Challenged</div><div>“A recent study by Competitive Enterprise Institute Adjunct Scholar Joel</div><div>Schwartz challenges the scientific basis of the Bush administration’s Clear Skies</div><div>Initiative and Senator Jim Jeffords’ (I-Vermont) Clean Power Act.”</div><div>Z.2003.07-18 Book Review by S. Fred Singer</div><div>Poverty: Public Enemy #1</div><div>“The Real Environmental Crisis: Why Poverty, not Affluence, Is the</div><div>Environment’s Number One Enemy, Jack M. Hollander …645</div><div>Warming Fears Overstated</div><div>Hollander gives a most expert discussion of climate change in the chapter titled</div><div>“Is the Earth Warming?” With the ongoing increase in atmospheric greenhouse</div><div>gases, one would expect some warming to occur; but it is difficult to discern a</div><div>small human contribution in the presence of large natural temperature</div><div>variations. Hollander mentions the difficult-to-explain cooling observed</div><div>between 1940 and 1975 and the apparent lack of atmospheric warming in the</div><div>last 20 years as recorded by satellite data. He thus reaches the inescapable</div><div>conclusion that the human contribution is much weaker than expected from a</div><div>simple warming theory that does not address the complexity of the real</div><div>atmosphere.”</div><div>
</div><div>ramanathan.ucsd.edu</div><div>www.amacad.org/publications/bulletin/spring2006/12globalwarming.pdf</div><div>“The effect of greenhouse gases on global warming is, in my opinion, the most</div><div>important environmental issue facing the world today.”</div><div>It is an important effect and the general topic was already discussed in the IPCC</div><div>TAR (2001), p.298 (f). See Index for aerosols – black carbon. Ramanathan’s</div><div>work improved on that, but did not contradict and confound warming theories.</div><div>645 MAS2009 p.104. Hollander (b. 1924) signed the 2009 petition to APS.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>126</div><div>Z.2003.08</div><div>646</div><div>Z.2003.08-1 Ben Lieberman</div><div>Lung Association Distorts Air Quality Data</div><div>“The American Lung Association’s (ALA) new study, State of the Air: 2003,</div><div>gave a failing grade on air quality to more than half the nation’s counties. Its</div><div>findings, while widely and uncritically reported by the popular press, are at odds</div><div>with the data and more credible sources.</div><div>For example, the 2003 Index of Environmental Indicators, a joint effort of the</div><div>Pacific Research Institute and American Enterprise Institute (PRI-AEI),</div><div>described the improvements in air quality as “probably the greatest</div><div>environmental success story of the last generation.”</div><div>PRI and AEI took tobacco money for at least a decade, Fig. F.4..</div><div>Z.2003.08-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Secondhand Smoke Fears Overstated</div><div>Z.2003.08-3 James Schlesinger647</div><div>Climate Change: The Science Isn’t Settled</div><div>Z.2003.08-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>U.S. Set to Join Anti-Smoking Treaty</div><div>Z.2003.08-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>Congress Mulls FDA Authority over Tobacco</div><div>“While it’s true tobacco-related illnesses affect many people,” noted</div><div>Robert Levy, senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute,</div><div>“that does not make cigarettes a public health problem. Smoking is not</div><div>infectious. We have not been attacked by a foreign power wielding nicotine.</div><div>“Smoking is a private decision that adults can make without guidance from the</div><div>nanny state…disclose the risks…Then each adult can choose whether to be</div><div>smokefree or free to smoke.”</div><div>Z.2003.08-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Study Finds No Health Risks for Above-Average Mercury Levels</div><div>
</div><div>646heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/12604.pdf</div><div>647 “James Schlesinger, who has served as secretary of energy, made these</div><div>comments at a symposium on the 25th anniversary of the Energy Department’s</div><div>CO2/climate change program. ...” MAS2011f: Schlesinger also quoted Crichton.</div><div>Z.2003.09</div><div>648</div><div>Z.2003.09-12Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>The Heartland Institute’s 19thAnniversary Benefit</div><div>Two images portray Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin,</div><div>both fine scientists and supporters of education (U</div><div>Pennsylvania and U Virginia originated with them.)</div><div>Does E&CN offer science and education? Would these men approve?</div><div>Z.2003.09-16 S. Fred Singer (like Z.2003.07, changes Bold)</div><div>649</div><div>Alarmists’ Claims Defy Global Warming Science</div><div>“A press release from the federally supported National Center for Atmospheric</div><div>Research (NCAR) claims a “New Look at Satellite Data Supports Global</div><div>Warming Trend.” That claim is likely to be trumpeted by supporters of the</div><div>Kyoto Protocol, who want to restrict drastically the use of energy in the U.S.</div><div>and abroad.</div><div> But the NCAR findings are based on the wishful thinking of well-known</div><div>global-warming promoters, rather than on sound science. …</div><div> The NCAR findings were published by the journal Science …</div><div>The RSS results would be a closer match with surface warming, as well as with</div><div>computer-model simulations, and are therefore preferred by the NCAR group.</div><div>But are the RSS results correct? I don’t think so:</div><div>Wentz presented the RSS analysis of the satellite data on December 4 in</div><div>Washington, DC …</div><div> But if the RSS analysis is not correct, then the NCAR study is mostly hot air.</div><div>As science journalist Ron Bailey points out: “Evidently, the strategy being used</div><div>by Santer et al. is that if their models don’t agree with the data, then change the</div><div>data.” Our hope is that Congress does not buy into this shell game.” IRS-3E,</div><div>Meme-38, Meme-20</div><div>
</div><div>648heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/12805.pdf</div><div>649 Apparently the earlier article was not enough, so Singer repeated it, with extra</div><div>disparaging comments.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>127</div><div>Z.2003.10650</div><div>Z.2003.10-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Maine Passes Carbon Dioxide Law</div><div>Z.2003.10-1 David Wojick</div><div>20th Century Warming Not Unprecedented, Experts Testify</div><div>The “experts” were Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist</div><div>infamous for bad climate papers.651</div><div>Z.2003.10-4 James M. Inhofe (excerpted by James M. Taylor)</div><div>Senator Refutes Global Warming Hypothesis Part 1</div><div>Inhofe is well-known, Koch Industries has been his largest contributor, and</div><div>Oil&Gas is the largest industry.652</div><div>Z.2003.10-6 Ben Lieberman</div><div>Ozone Depletion’s Lessons for Global Warming</div><div>Z.2003.10-10 Robert l. Bradley, Jr</div><div>Energy Realism Is Overtaking Energy Alarmism</div><div>Z.2003.10-12 David Deming653</div><div>Abundant Reserves Show Petroleum Age Is Just Beginning</div><div>Z.2003.10-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>State CO2 Caps a Costly Symbolic Statement</div><div>
</div><div>650heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/12907.pdf</div><div>651 This was another version of the infamously-bad paper, Z.2003.07.1.</div><div>652 www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00005582&cycle=Career</div><div>653 “David Deming is an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy</div><div>Analysis and associate professor of geology and geophysics at the University of</div><div>Oklahoma. Copyright 2003 David Deming; reprinted with permission.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>128</div><div>Z.2003.12654</div><div>Z.2003.12-1 GLOBAL TEMPERATURES</div><div>In this issue, the format changed slightly. The first page had</div><div>an EarthTrack logo, and the interior section usually expanded</div><div>to ~ half page. Titles changed over time.</div><div>§Y.1 discusses the problems.. They are still misleading.</div><div>Z.2003.12-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Bill Defeated</div><div>Z.2003.12-1b Jay Lehr</div><div>Eco-Terrorists Increase Attacks</div><div>Z.2003.12-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Federal Study Finds Lighter Vehicles Cause More Deaths</div><div>“Fresh evidence that higher CAFE standards would sacrifice human life for fuel</div><div>efficiency …</div><div>Although the study adds to the weight of evidence that fuel economy standards</div><div>sacrifice human life for energy conservation, the NHTSA did not explicitly reach</div><div>that conclusion in its report”</div><div>Z.2003.12-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>GM Announces Hybrid Technology for Mass Transit655</div><div>Z.2003.12-6 Ben Lieberman</div><div>Beltway Smog in Retreat</div><div>
</div><div>654heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/13746.pdf</div><div>655 Generally, E&CN denigrates hybrids as overly expensive. I’m surprised to see</div><div>this. Perhaps E&CN thinks hybrids are good for buses, but not cars? Of course,</div><div>GM has been a donor to Heartland.</div><div>“Longtime residents have never experienced better air quality …</div><div>Nonetheless, those who see Washington’s air pollution as a crisis are demanding</div><div>even greater sacrifices from the area’s residents and businesses. For example,</div><div>rather than improve the area’s chronically congested roads and build new ones,</div><div>some local activists and officials prefer to keep the traffic problems in place so</div><div>as to discourage driving, expand public transportation as an alternative, and</div><div>implement other “smart growth” restrictions on area residents’ lifestyle</div><div>choices.”</div><div>656</div><div>Z.2003.12-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>States Sue EPA for Refusing to Regulate CO2</div><div>Z.2003.12-9 Kenneth Green, PhD</div><div>High Costs of Kyoto Compliance Punishing Canadians657</div><div>Z.2003.12-10 James M. Inhofe (excerpted by James M. Taylor)</div><div>Senator: No Warming Trend Evident in Twentieth Century Part 2</div><div>“But in fact, there is no meaningful warming trend in the troposphere, and</div><div>weather satellites, widely considered the most accurate measure of global</div><div>temperatures, have confirmed this.</div><div>Z.2003.12-12 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Houghton Calls Global Warming a “Weapon of Mass Destruction”</div><div>
</div><div>656 E&CN offers fascinating combinations. The EPA is reviled … but air quality</div><div>has magically gotten better. Cars are cleaner, but electrics and hybrids are</div><div>usually mocked. I’ve driven around Washington, DC. Where does one build new</div><div>roads? E&CN worries hugely about bird deaths from wind turbines, mercury</div><div>from CFLs, and human deaths from lighter cars. But DDT and coal are fine,</div><div>mercury in fish is no problem and people should drive more.</div><div>657 Canada has not signed Kyoto or implemented it, so punishment seems unclear.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>129</div><div>Z.2004 9 issues</div><div>Z.2004.01658</div><div>Z.2004.01-1 Diane Carol Bast</div><div>Russia May Doom Kyoto Protocol</div><div>Z.2004.01-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA Proposes Mercury Limits</div><div>“U.S. becomes first nation to require cuts”</div><div>Z.2004.04-8 Jay Lehr, Phd</div><div>NPR Spreads Misinformation about Renewable Energy</div><div>Z.2004.06 James M. Inhofe (excerpted by James M. Taylor)</div><div>Senator Refutes Global Warming Hypothesis Part 3</div><div>Z.2004.01-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>NY Times: Greenhouse Gases May Avert Next Ice Age659</div><div>“Already, there is mounting scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric</div><div>carbon dioxide are resulting in more proficient crop production” Meme-120</div><div>Z.2004.01-8 S. Fred Singer660</div><div>Kyoto Down the Drain? What Next?</div><div>“Careful reviewers of the three IPCC reports have noticed the “evidence” has</div><div>changed from report to report—but never the conclusions. Pretty suspicious. So</div><div>we can now ask out loud: What new evidence? And is it really supported by</div><div>actual observations?</div><div>From the very first, the IPCC report summaries (the only part read by outsiders)</div><div>have carefully ignored all evidence contrary to their perennial conclusions. The</div><div>litany has been constant:661 That the climate is currently warming; that the cause</div><div>is human emitted greenhouse gases; and that a major warming (implied to be</div><div>catastrophic) will soon be upon us.”</div><div>
</div><div>658heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/14044.pdf</div><div>659 Yes, they have, for 10’s of thousands of years, just as a runway thermostat</div><div>avoids a temperate drop, but causes other problems.</div><div>660 “His email address is ssinger1@gmu.edu.”</div><div>661 The real litany has been Singer’s, in the face of accumulating evidence.</div><div>Z.2004.01-9 Paul Driessen</div><div>CORE Mocks Environmentalists in Cancun</div><div>Z.2004.01-12 Heartland half-page ad</div><div>Meet 20/20 Co-Anchor John Stossel</div><div>Z.2004.01-18 James M. Taylor</div><div>Environmental Vigilantism Is Not “Free Speech”</div><div>Says Greenpeace is bad, argues against raising money under pretense of</div><div>“educational activities.”662</div><div>Z.2004.01-20 Heartland full page ad</div><div>Global Warming Fact, Myth, or Scare Tactic? IRS-3E</div><div>Get the full story – subscribe to E&CN</div><div>
</div><div>662 As in any large organization, they may sometimes cross the line and this might</div><div>have been one such case. Of course, does the reader trust Taylor to be objective?</div><div>It is interesting to see the complaint about tax-free status and education.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>130</div><div>Z.2004.02</div><div>663</div><div>Z.2004.02-1 Banner</div><div>… | … | WARMING MYTHS IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2004.02-1a Steve Milloy</div><div>FDA Mercury Warning Based on Junk Science, Experts Say</div><div>Z.2004.02-1b Duane Freese</div><div>Science Debunks “Precautionary Principle”</div><div>“The problems of the “precautionary principle” received a thorough airing from</div><div>its critics at a December 12 forum sponsored by the George C. Marshall Institute</div><div>…”</div><div>Z.2004.02-1c James M. Taylor</div><div>Democrats Dodge Campaign Finance Law with Environment 2004</div><div>Z.2004.02-6 S. Fred Singer</div><div>What We Know about Global Warming</div><div>“Is the climate really warming? Weather satellites measuring atmospheric</div><div>temperatures day in and day out from pole to pole report only a minute rise that</div><div>extrapolates to about half a degree Centigrade by 2100. Meme-38</div><div> Is this rise caused by human activities, like the burning of coal, oil, and gas?</div><div>That’s difficult to tell—climate varies naturally both up and down, so it could</div><div>be partly non-human. Meme-31</div><div> Is the observed warming significant? That’s a matter of judgment, but half a</div><div>degree is barely detectable and not likely to have an impact.</div><div> Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that global warming will accelerate in</div><div>the future. Would such a warming be good or bad? After all, it is quite unlikely</div><div>the present climate is in any way optimal.</div><div> Meteorologists tell us that a warmer climate will on the whole produce more</div><div>rain—and thus fresh water—but not more severe storms or hurricanes. The</div><div>warming would be concentrated in high latitude regions north and south and</div><div>would mainly raise temperatures at night in winter. So Arctic winters might</div><div>reach minus 38 instead of the present minus 40 degrees. There would be few</div><div>complaints ... even if polar bears and penguins could talk.</div><div>
</div><div>663heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/14297.pdf</div><div> Economists tell us a moderate warming would be better for the economy and</div><div>lead to a higher GNP and higher living standards worldwide. That is especially</div><div>true, biologists tell us, if we also achieve a higher level of carbon dioxide in the</div><div>atmosphere. Meme-20</div><div> Contrary to all you might have heard, CO2 is not a pollutant, but an essential</div><div>component of the Earth’s atmosphere. With the help of sunshine and trace</div><div>nutrients, plants turn CO2 into food and fiber. More CO2—better growth of</div><div>crops and forests. Meme-20</div><div> Geologists tell us that levels of CO2 have been 10 to 20 times the present</div><div>level—and life in various forms did quite nicely. But CO2 has been declining</div><div>more or less steadily in the past 200 million years, reaching dangerously low</div><div>levels during ice ages. Some worry that in the next ice age, soon to arrive,664 it</div><div>may fall below the level to sustain plant growth.”</div><div> Now suppose everything we know is wrong and that the precautionary</div><div>principle should be applied. What can we do and what should we do? Actually,</div><div>there is practically nothing we can do to change the course of climate—short of</div><div>gigantic and risky planetary engineering, like putting megatons of dust into the</div><div>stratosphere and similar fanciful schemes. Certainly, the much-touted Kyoto</div><div>Protocol, which would force us to use less energy by boosting its price, would</div><div>be completely ineffective; it has been rejected by the United States and ignored</div><div>by China and other giant energy consumers.</div><div> Adaptation is the only sensible answer to climate change, whether natural or</div><div>human-caused.”</div><div>Z.2004.02-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Greenhouse Gases Staved off Ice Age</div><div>“The revelation also dispels the notion that global warming is necessarily</div><div>harmful to humans or to the planet itself.”</div><div>This describes the work of Bill Ruddiman, a fine climate scientist.</div><div>665</div><div>
</div><div>664 Perhaps 50,000 years, if then. David Archer, The Long Thaw, 2008.</div><div>665 Plows, Plagues and Petroleum (2005) noted “alternate universe” in which</div><div>“most of the basic findings of mainstream science are rejected or ignored.”E&CN?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>131</div><div>Z.2004.02-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>New Study Confirms Dramatic Urban Heat Island Effect</div><div>“The new AGU study bolsters the evidence that surface-based temperature</div><div>readings reflect localized human population growth rather than any significant</div><div>increase in global temperatures.”</div><div>666</div><div> Meme-20</div><div>Quotes: CSCDGC.</div><div>Z.2004.02-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Sacramento Bee Seeks to Out-Alarm New York Times</div><div>Taylor is mostly wrong. For example. The Sacramento Bee writes:</div><div>“ Small increases in the sea level could have huge impacts in the SacramentoSan</div><div>Joaquin Delta, where a saltwater intrusion would wreak havoc on the pumps</div><div>that provide water for farming and for the economy of 17 million people in</div><div>Southern California.(3)”</div><div>Taylor writes:</div><div>“Scientific evidence shows sea level is not rising or is rising at a rate</div><div>consistent with post-ice age history. Moreover, even if sea levels rose a couple of</div><div>feet, as predicted by alarmists, this would have no impact on the water table for</div><div>Sacramento, which is dozens of miles and a coastal mountain range removed</div><div>from the sea.”</div><div>The San Joaquin River flows to the Pacific under the Golden Gate, not by</div><div>flowing uphill. The Sacrament-San Joaquin Delta667 is the area from</div><div>which much water is drawn, not for the city of Sacramento, which is</div><div>upstream, but for other parts of California. The Delta is already under</div><div>stress and much of it is below sea-level, as anyone would ever know who</div><div>has driven through that area, crosscrossed by levees.</div><div>Salt water incursion is of great concern in a fine farming area. A 1-meter</div><div>(3 ft) flood map shows the concern.</div><div>668</div><div>Taylor writes with great assurance. Does he actually know anything about</div><div>this?</div><div>
</div><div>666 No, it doesn’t. NASA GISS and others recognized this effect and used good</div><div>statistics to correct for it years before.</div><div>667 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento%E2%80%93San_Joaquin_River_Delta</div><div>668 flood.firetree.net/?ll=38.0805,-122.0087&z=8&m=1</div><div>Z.2004.03</div><div>669</div><div>Z.2004.03-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>New Jersey Adopts California’s Vehicle Emissions Standards</div><div>Z.2004.03-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>California Law Could Force 30% Cut in GHG Emissions</div><div>Z.2004.03-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Experts Expose Flaws in Global Warming Extinction Predictions</div><div>“It did not take long, however, for Virginia state climatologist Patrick Michaels</div><div>to identify major flaws in the study.</div><div>Quotes: Pat Michaels (later CATO) and Iain Murray (CEI) and a few</div><div>others.</div><div>Z.2004.03-10 Book review by Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Sound Science for the [Overly] Concerned Public</div><div>“The Progress Paradox: How Life Gets Better While People Feel Worse</div><div>by Gregg Easterbrook (Random House Publishers, 2003; 376 pages, $24.95,</div><div>ISBN: 0679463038)”</div><div>
</div><div>669heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/14564.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>132</div><div>Z.2004.03-10a Heartland half-page ad</div><div>Sound Books on Sound Science</div><div>“Saving the Planet with Plastics and Pesticides (2000)</div><div>by Dennis Avery</div><div>The True State of the Planet (1995)</div><div>by Ronald Bailey</div><div>Eco-Sanity: A Common-Sense Guide</div><div>to Environmentalism (1994)</div><div>by Joseph L. Bast et al.</div><div>Rational Readings on</div><div>Environmental Concerns (1991)</div><div>by Jay H. Lehr, Ph.D</div><div>The Skeptical Environmentalist (2001)</div><div>by Björn Lomborg</div><div>Junk Science Judo (2001)</div><div>by Steven Milloy</div><div>Trashing the Planet (1989)</div><div>by Dixy Lee Ray</div><div>Facts Not Fear: A Parent’s</div><div>Guide to Teaching Children</div><div>about the Environment(1999)</div><div>by Michael Sanera and Jane Shaw</div><div>The State of Humanity (1996)</div><div>by Julian Simon</div><div>The Ultimate Resource 2 (1998)</div><div>by Julian Simon”</div><div>I have read a few of these. They are certainly consistent.</div><div>Z.2004.03-12 Ben Lieberman</div><div>New Cars Are Dramatically Cleaner</div><div>“Of course, many activists and regulators are reluctant to admit success, and</div><div>they can be expected to downplay the progress.”</div><div>Z.2004.03-14 Robert Rio670</div><div>Mercury: Grain of Truth, Gram of Nonsense</div><div>Z.2004.03-16 James M. Taylor</div><div>Maryland Further Restricts Appliance Efficiency Choices671</div><div>Z.2004.03-17 James M. Taylor</div><div>Enviro Group Sues Wind Farm to Stop Bird Deaths</div><div>“New studies show greater-than-expected harm to humans, wildlife”</div><div>Altamont Pass was a 1970s windfarm, with small, fast moving turbines</div><div>that turned out to be badly-sited. The problem is being fixed via larger</div><div>turbines that turn less quickly.672</div><div>Z.2004.03-19 James M. Taylor</div><div>Al Gore’s Untimely Global Warming Speech</div><div>
</div><div>670 “Robert Rio is vice president of environmental programs at Associated</div><div>Industries of Massachusetts.” www.aimnet.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home</div><div>671 California has a very long history driving appliance energy efficiency.</div><div>Manufacturers complain, then find that better energy efficiency often saves them</div><div>money and improves their products.</div><div>672 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamont_Pass_Wind_Farm I’ve driven past these often.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>133</div><div>Z.2004.05</div><div>673</div><div>Z.2004.05-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Health Threat of Mercury Overblown, Scientists Say</div><div>Z.2004.05-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Conn. Global Warming Bill Will Pump up Energy Prices</div><div>“Energy prices and unemployment in Connecticut are expected to spike if the</div><div>state legislature passes a greenhouse gas control measure supported by Governor</div><div>John Rowland (R).”</div><div>Quotes: Sandy Liddy Bourne (ALEC)</div><div>Z.2004.05-13 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Latest Global Warming Claims Flawed, Inflated</div><div>“Energy prices and unemployment in Connecticut are expected to spike if the</div><div>state legislature passes a greenhouse gas control measure supported by Governor</div><div>John Rowland (R).”</div><div>Z.2004.05-14 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Requiem for the Kyoto Protocol</div><div>Z.2004.05-15 Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>ORDER YOUR COPY OF Hot Talk, Cold Science by S. Fred Singer</div><div>Z.2004.05-16 James M. Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Fears Melting674</div><div>“New studies appearing in respected scientific journals suggest time is running</div><div>out for the biggest eco-scare of the twentieth century”</div><div>Quotes: Sherwood Idso (CSCDGC), Singer (SEPP)</div><div>I don’t know the other papers, but I have looked at the Climate Research</div><div>paper by Chase, et al, and it is basically wrong.675</div><div>
</div><div>673heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/14874.pdf</div><div>674 No. The Idso’s seem to scan the literature hunting articles for Taylor.</div><div>675 It used old versions of the satellite/radiosonde data that created spurious</div><div>cooling.</div><div>Z.2004.06</div><div>676</div><div>Z.2004.06-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>Smokers and Businesses Oppose Beach Smoking Bans677</div><div>“As a smoker, I’ve paid my share of taxes. Why can’t I</div><div>smoke in the open air?”</div><div>Z.2004.06-9 Ben Lieberman</div><div>EPA Launches Costly New Smog Standard</div><div>Z.2004.06-10 Amy Ridenour (NCPPR)</div><div>AP Fumbles Global Warming Story678</div><div>“In late March, the Associated Press ran a global warming story [1] that makes a</div><div>number of misleading, if not downright inaccurate, statements.</div><div>Faulty “news” stories like this one, which mislead people all over the world, do</div><div>not reflect a consensus of scientists. It is alarming that a media outlet as</div><div>influential as AP would run a story this wrong …</div><div>. But most of the observed twentieth century warming occurred in the first</div><div>few decades of that century [6].”</div><div>Z.2004.06-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>British Studies Show Prohibitive Cost of “Renewable” Energy</div><div>Wind power, other renewables twice as expensive as emissions-free</div><div>nuclear power</div><div>Z.2004.06-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>Washington Governor Signs Costly Global Warming Bill</div><div>Z.2004.06-17 Steve Milloy</div><div>Earth Day Activists Ignore Progress</div><div>
</div><div>676heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/15004.pdf</div><div>677 articles.cnn.com/2011-05-23/us/new.york.smoking.ban_1_smoking-on-publicbeaches-smoking-ban-secondhand-smoke?s=PM:US</div><div>Los Angeles banned smoking on beaches after all. People still go to the beach.</div><div>Elsewhere, E&CN seems to strongly favor local decision-making, versus the EPA</div><div>or Federal government.</div><div>678 Ridenour repeats standard memes, including satellites, as per §Y.1</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>134</div><div>Z.2004.07</div><div>679</div><div>Z.2004.07-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney Unveils Climate Protection</div><div>Plan</div><div>Z.2004.07-3 Myron Ebell (CEI)</div><div>McCain Vows New Vote on Climate Change Bill</div><div>“Perhaps the Copenhagen meeting, a laudable exercise in rational</div><div>decisionmaking, will put global warming fears to rest. And one can always hope</div><div>the release of the climate-horror film, “The Day after Tomorrow,” will convince</div><div>the public that global warming is mostly science fiction.”</div><div>Z.2004.07-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Nature Study Fails to Dent Satellite Data</div><div>Global temperatures show no net warming</div><div>“According to UAH researchers, the satellite sensors show a long-term warming</div><div>trend in the lower atmosphere of only about 0.08º C per decade [about 1.4ºF per</div><div>century] in the past 25 years. Meme-38</div><div>[Spencer] This is one reason increasing numbers of scientists680 regard Science</div><div>and Nature as ‘gray’ scientific literature.””</div><div>Spencer has been wrong often, doing work rarely good enough for</div><div>Science or Nature. See §Y.1.</div><div>Z.2004.07-8 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Global Warming Takes Undeserving Place on Group’s “Top 10</div><div>Challenges” List</div><div>“Perhaps the Copenhagen meeting, a laudable exercise in rational</div><div>decisionmaking, will put global warming fears to rest. And one can always hope</div><div>the release of the climate-horror film, “The Day after Tomorrow,” will convince</div><div>the public that global warming is mostly science fiction.”</div><div>Z.2004.07-10 Iain Murray</div><div>Hybrids’ Disappointing Mileage Confounding State Laws</div><div>
</div><div>679heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/15269.pdf</div><div>680 Taylor invoked the “scientists” again, and his opinion about Science and</div><div>Nature is worthless.</div><div>Z.2004.07-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Geothermal Power Would Harm California, Claims Lawsuit</div><div>Z.2004.07-20 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Isn’t it time you joined a think tank?</div><div>“The right public policy choices could save the lives of</div><div>millions of people starving in Africa and around the</div><div>world.</div><div>Did you know that?” Meme-175</div><div>This version appears 7 times 2004.07-2005.05.</div><div>This is an example of a pervasive campaign by conservative and libertarian</div><div>think tanks to promote the idea that they are really, really trying to help</div><div>poor people around the world.681</div><div> Really poor people use almost no fossil</div><div>fuels and cannot outbid wealthier people for its use. Poor African farmers</div><div>will never have gasoline/diesel-powered tractors.</div><div>
</div><div>681 This also showed up in Bjorn Lomborg ‘s Cool It! For analysis, see:</div><div>thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/lomborg-long-game</div><div>It was a clever tactic and confused people.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>135</div><div>Z.2004.08</div><div>682</div><div>Z.2004.08-1 Sandy Liddy Bourne</div><div>California Regulators Issue Rules for GHG Reduction</div><div>Z.2004.08-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Washington Governor Signs Costly Global Warming Bill</div><div>Z.2004.08-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Fear of Mercury “Hot Spots” Unfounded</div><div>Z.2004.08-3a Steve Milloy</div><div>Global Warming Extremists Use Shareholder Actions to Pressure</div><div>Corporations</div><div>Z.2004.08-9 CATO Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>HEARTLAND EMERGING ISSUES FORUM</div><div>“ … day-long conference featuring panel presentations by public policy experts</div><div>from the nation’s leading free-market think tanks and advocacy groups. …. a</div><div>learning and networking opportunity for elected officials and their staff; IRS-5L</div><div>journalists who cover public policy; government affairs and public affairs</div><div>directors in businesses, trade associations, and civic organizations; investors and</div><div>investment advisors; and concerned citizens.”</div><div>683</div><div>Z.2004.08-19 Sallie Baliunas</div><div>Washington Governor Signs Costly Global Warming Bill</div><div>
</div><div>682heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/15445.pdf</div><div>683But no lobbying, of course.</div><div>Z.2004.09684</div><div>Z.2004.09-4 Iain Murray</div><div>Hybrid Vehicles Proving Costly in Miami-Dade County</div><div>Z.2004.09-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>Windmills Ruining Scenic Views, Producing Killing Fields</div><div>Z.2004.09-9 Iain Murray and Myron Ebell</div><div>State Attorneys General Sue Utilities over Global Warming</div><div>Z.2004.09-12 Iain Murray and Myron Ebell</div><div>Nature Admits Widely Cited Global Warming Graph Was Erroneous</div><div>This is part of the attack on the hockey-stick, of which Ebell was one of the</div><div>main orchestrators.</div><div>685</div><div> The corrections were fairly routine and minor,</div><div>nothing like the large errors repeatedly made by Spencer and Christy.</div><div>Z.2004.09-15 Ben Lieberman</div><div>Proposed EPA Mercury Rule Garners Comments, Controversy</div><div>Z.2004.09-19 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Human Rights vs. Animal Rights</div><div>Lehr reviews:</div><div>Putting Humans First: Why We Are Nature’s Favorites, Tibor R. Machan,</div><div>Rowman and Littlefield, 2004.</div><div>See Z.2007.11.-13 for an article by Machan, and the end of §H.1 for</div><div>possible funding connections with the Liberty Institute (India).</div><div>
</div><div>684heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/15570.pdf</div><div>685 MAS2010a.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>136</div><div>Z.2004.10686</div><div>Z.2004.10-1 James Taylor</div><div>Renewable Energy Mandates Raise Prices and Cost States Jobs</div><div>Z.2004.10-1 James Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Computer Models Are Still Unreliable, New Study</div><div>Warns Meme-05</div><div>Z.2004.10-6 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>National Geographic Promotes Global Warming Myths</div><div>Lehr repeats standard memes.</div><div>Z.2004.10-17Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>California’s Draconian Auto- Emission Standards Won’t Reduce</div><div>Global Warming.</div><div>Z.2004.10-7 Patrick J. Michaels, S. Fred Singer, David H. Douglass687</div><div>Global Warming Computer Models Seriously Flawed, Studies Show</div><div>“How many times have we heard from former Vice President Al Gore and</div><div>assorted European politicians that “the science is settled” on global warming?</div><div>In other words, it’s “time for action.” Climate change is, as recently stated by</div><div>Hans Blix, former United Nations chief for weapons detection in Iraq, the most</div><div>important issue of our time, far more dangerous than people flying fuel-laden</div><div>aircraft into skyscrapers or possibly detonating backpack nukes in Baltimore</div><div>Harbor.</div><div> Well, the science may now be settled, but not in the way Gore and Blix would</div><div>have us believe. Three bombshell papers have just hit the refereed literature that</div><div>knock the stuffing out of Blix’s position and that of his company, the United</div><div>Nations, and its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).</div><div> The IPCC states repeatedly:</div><div>1. We have reliable temperature records showing how much the planet has</div><div>warmed in the past century.</div><div>2. Computer projections of future climate, while not perfect, simulate the</div><div>observed behavior of the past so well they are a reliable guide for the future.</div><div>
</div><div>686heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/15735.pdf</div><div>687“David H. Douglass (…) is professor of physics at the University of Rochester.”</div><div> Therefore, they say, we need to limit carbon dioxide emissions (i.e., energy</div><div>use) right now, despite the expense and even though the cost will fall almost</div><div>entirely on the United States, gravely harming the world’s economic engine</div><div>while exerting no detectable change on climate in the foreseeable future.</div><div>Meme-05</div><div>Urban Heat Islands Skew Data</div><div>The IPCC claims to have carefully corrected the temperature records for the</div><div>well-known problem of local (“urban,” as opposed to global) warming. But this</div><div>has always troubled serious scientists, because the way the U.N. checks for</div><div>artificial warming makes it virtually impossible to detect the urban “heat</div><div>island” effect in recent decades—the same period over which our cities have</div><div>undergone the greatest growth and sprawl. Meme-20</div><div> The surface temperature record shows a warming rate of about 0.17º Celsius</div><div>(0.31º Fahrenheit) per decade since 1979. However, there are two other</div><div>records— one from satellites, the other from weather balloons—that tell a</div><div>different story. Neither annual satellite nor balloon trends differ significantly</div><div>from zero since the satellite record started in 1979. These records reflect</div><div>temperatures in what is called the lower atmosphere, or roughly between 5,000</div><div>and 30,000 feet. Meme-38</div><div> Four years ago, a distinguished panel of the U.S. National Academy of</div><div>Sciences concluded there is a real disparity between the reported surface</div><div>warming and the temperature trends measured in the atmosphere above. Since</div><div>then, many investigators have tried to explain the cause of the disparity, while</div><div>others have denied its existence. Meme-38</div><div>Balloons Show Little Warming</div><div>So, which record is right: the U.N. surface record showing the larger warming,</div><div>or the other two? Meme-38</div><div> There’s another record, from seven feet above the ground, derived from</div><div>balloon data recently released by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric</div><div>Administration (NOAA).</div><div> In two research papers in the July 9 issue of Geophysical Research Letters,</div><div>two of the authors of this article (Douglass and Singer) compared the NOAA</div><div>record for correspondence with the surface record and the lower atmosphere</div><div>histories. The odd-record-out turns out to be the U.N.’s hot-surface history.</div><div> This is a double kill, both on the U.N.’s temperature records and on its</div><div>vaunted climate models. That’s because the models generally predict a</div><div>warming rate that increases with height above the Earth’s surface (outside of</div><div>local polar regions). But neither the satellite nor the balloon records can find it.</div><div>When this was noted in the first satellite paper published in 1990, some</div><div>scientists objected that the record, which began in 1979, was too short. Now we</div><div>have a quarter- century of concurrent balloon and satellite data, both screaming </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>137</div><div>that the U.N.’s climate models have failed, as well as indicating its surface</div><div>record is simply too hot. Meme-38</div><div> If the U.N.’s models are wrong as one goes up in the atmosphere, then any</div><div>correspondence between them and surface temperatures is either pretty lucky or</div><div>the product of some unspecified “adjustment.” Getting the vertical distribution</div><div>of temperature wrong means everything dependent upon that—precipitation</div><div>and cloudiness, as examples—must be wrong. Obviously, the amount of cloud</div><div>in the air determines the day’s high temperature as well as whether it rains.</div><div> As bad as things have gone for the IPCC and its ideologues, it gets worse—</div><div>much, much worse. IRS-3E</div><div>Economic Assumptions</div><div>After four years of one of the most rigorous peer reviews ever, Canadian</div><div>economist Ross McKitrick and another of the authors of this article (Michaels)</div><div>published a paper searching for “economic” signals in the temperature record.</div><div>McKitrick was initially piqued by what several climatologists had noted as a</div><div>curiosity in both the U.N. and satellite records: Statistically speaking, the greater</div><div>a nation’s gross domestic product, the more it warms.688 The research showed</div><div>that somewhere around half of the warming in the U.N. surface record was</div><div>explained by economic factors, which can include changes in land use, quality</div><div>of instrumentation, and upkeep of records.</div><div> This worldwide study added fuel to a fire started a year earlier by the</div><div>University of Maryland’s Eugenia Kalnay, who had calculated a similar 50</div><div>percent bias due to economic factors in the U.S. records.</div><div> So, to all who worry about global warming, you may rest assured that the</div><div>science is indeed settled. The “skeptics”— the strange name applied to those</div><div>whose work shows the planet isn’t coming to an end—have won.”</div><div>
</div><div>688 This is another infamously bad paper, which confused degrees and radians, then</div><div>went downhill from there.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/are-temperature-trends-affectedby-economic-activity</div><div>It was the last slipped through Climate Research via Chris</div><div>de Freitas, just before mass resignations.</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-prefer-pal-review-over-peer-review-chris-defreitas-pat-michaels-and-their-pals-1997-2003</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>138</div><div>Z.2005 10 issues</div><div>Z.2005.01689</div><div>Z.2005.01-1 Gretchen Randall</div><div>Senator Exposes Partisan “Charities” in Floor Speech</div><div>The Senator was James Inhofe.</div><div>Environmental groups are often public charities. So are most of</div><div>these think tanks.</div><div>Z.2005-01-3 Steven Milloy</div><div>Environmentalists Call for Drastic Reductions in Greenhouse</div><div>Emissions</div><div>Z.2005-01-8 Environment and Climate News</div><div>is free for elected officials. Others may subscribe</div><div>for $36 for 10 issues.</div><div>This appears often.</div><div>Z.2005-01-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>TILTING AT WINDMILLS (Don Quixote was right)</div><div>
</div><div>689heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/16211.pdf</div><div>Z.2005.01-16 Letter to Senator McCain</div><div>Scientists Dispute Sensational Claims of Arctic Ice Melt</div><div>“Eleven distinguished690 scientists, most of whom specialize in climatology691</div><div>,</div><div>on November 16 published an open letter to Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who</div><div>has repeatedly sponsored congressional legislation that mirrors the Kyoto</div><div>Protocol, which was rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1997 by a vote of 95-0. The</div><div>letter disputes assertions by McCain and other alarmists that the Arctic climate is</div><div>undergoing remarkable and catastrophic climate change. At the right are excerpts</div><div>from the text of the letter.</div><div>Z.2005.01-17 Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas</div><div>Consensus Can Be Bad for Climate Science</div><div>Z.2005.01-17a S. Fred Singer</div><div>Arctic Ice Hype</div><div>
</div><div>690 No.</div><div>691 No.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>139</div><div>Z.2005.02692</div><div>Z.2005.02-1 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Crichton Strikes Devastating Blow to Alarmists</div><div>“Top-selling novel contains hard science exposing the folly</div><div>of global warming alarmism.”</div><div>This began a long series in which Heartland frequently693 promoted a</div><div>fiction author and screenwriter as having disproved mainstream climate</div><div>science. IRS-0E</div><div>If a TV actor who plays a doctor tells children it is safe to smoke, does that</div><div>make it safe or is that a fakexpert being promoted? See §Y.2 for detailed</div><div>discussion of Crichton’s errors and misinformation.</div><div>Z.2005.02.5 James Hoare</div><div>New Jersey Seeking to Cap CO2 Emissions</div><div>EPA, climate experts contradict alarmism</div><div>Z.2005.02-8 Joel Schwartz</div><div>Smog Declines Still Further from 2003 Record Lows</div><div>Media fail to pass on good news to public</div><div>Z.2005.02-11 Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas</div><div>Wind Farms May Threaten Crop Productions</div><div>
</div><div>692heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/16211.pdf</div><div>693 Figure X.3.1 shows 8 articles involving Crichton and 20 half-page “Crichton is</div><div>Right!” advertisements through January 2009.</div><div>Z.2005.04694</div><div>Z.2005.04-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Climate Scientist Quits IPCC, Blasts Politicized “Preconceived</div><div>Agendas”</div><div>Z.2005.04-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>New Jersey Ignores Science on Mercury”</div><div>Z.2005.04-7 Duane Freese</div><div>U.S. Fighting off Kyoto Restrictions</div><div>Z.2005.04-9 Steve McIntyre</div><div>Climate Alarmists Playing Shell game with Data IRS-2E, IRS-3E</div><div>This is hockey-stick attack in full swing, although picture of McIntyre</div><div>seems rather out of date.</div><div>Z.2005.04-11 S. Fred Singer</div><div>U.S. Fighting off Kyoto Restrictions IRS-2E, IRS-3E, see §Y.1</div><div>‘“The twentieth century has turned out not to be ‘unusual,’ as was claimed. The</div><div>most accurate measurement of atmospheric temperatures from weather satellites</div><div>shows little, if any, current warming.”’ Meme-38</div><div>“Congress has its well-known purveyors of global warming fears, especially in</div><div>the Senate. Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) co-chaired the International Task</div><div>Force on Climate Change, which has predicted unimaginable catastrophes unless</div><div>the United States adopts the Kyoto Protocol. Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and</div><div>Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) are preparing to trot out the latest iteration of their</div><div>Climate Stewardship bill, which would impose crippling restrictions on the U.S.</div><div>economy. Environmental organizations are acting predictably, garnering</div><div>megabucks from gullible foundations and support from the “amen-chorus” of the</div><div>New York Times, Washington Post, and even National Geographic and Scientific</div><div>American. Particularly troublesome is the orientation of the editors of leading</div><div>scientific journals such as Science and Nature, which seem to be impervious to</div><div>the growing body of scientific evidence that defines global warming as a nonproblem.”</div><div>
</div><div>694heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/16821.pdf </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>140</div><div>Z.2005.04-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>Science Verifies Crichton’s State of Fear Assertions695</div><div>Book’s citations pass factual background check IRS-2E, IRS-3E</div><div>“Michael Crichton’s new novel, State of Fear, has created a whirlwind of</div><div>controversy as global warming alarmists try frantically to discredit the author’s</div><div>tenacious assault on global warming theory. Before State of Fear, the leftleaning</div><div>editorial hierarchy of major national media outlets successfully weeded</div><div>out the scientific skepticism toward alarmist global warming theory before</div><div>television and newspaper stories reached the general public. Crichton’s end-run</div><div>around censorship has created a maelstrom of wrath and fury from alarmists,</div><div>who realize the millions of citizens reading his novel will likely translate into</div><div>millions of newly converted skeptics of global warming alarmism.” §Y.2.</div><div>Z.2005.04-16 Michael Fumento</div><div>Ohio City Debates Proposed Smoking Ban</div><div>Science author shocks, angers activists with facts</div><div>Z.2005.04-19 James Hoare (cont from p1)</div><div>Ban Killed Millions</div><div>“It might be easy for some to dismiss the past 43 years of eco-hysteria over</div><div>DDT with a simple ‘never mind,’” asserted Steve Milloy, an adjunct scholar at</div><div>the Cato Institute, “except for the blood of millions of people dripping from the</div><div>hands of the WWF, Greenpeace, Rachel Carson, Environmental Defense Fund,</div><div>and other junk science-fueled opponents of DDT.”</div><div>
</div><div>695 No, science did not.</div><div>Z.2005.05696</div><div>Z.2005.05-1 Henry I. Miller and Sandy Szearc697</div><div>EPA Issues Cap-and-Trade Mercury Rule</div><div>“If a final mercury rule pushes electric generators to shift from reliable and</div><div>abundant domestic coal resources to potentially less reliable and higher-cost</div><div>natural gas, the result will be increased electricity prices and higher costs for</div><div>home heating, food, and a host of consumer and industrial products.”</div><div>SCOTT SEGAL, DIRECTOR</div><div>ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COORDINATING COUNCIL”</div><div>Z.2005.05-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Crichton’s State of Fear Lauded in Congress</div><div>“Best-selling novels are not often praised in Senate floor speeches. Of course, it</div><div>is not often that best-selling novels offer riveting discourse on important</div><div>scientific research and public policy matters. On January 4, Sen. James Inhofe</div><div>(R-OK) …” plus another half-page on p.13 §Y.2.</div><div>Z.2005.05-4 Joel Schwartz</div><div>California Considers Stringent Ozone Standard</div><div>Citizens to pay price for minor improvements</div><div>Z.2005.05-4a Heartland</div><div>Global Satellite Temperatures</div><div>STILL NO SIGN OF GLOBAL WARMING Meme-38</div><div>The title changed from EarthTrack to this. It is a clear untruth.</div><div>Z.2005.05-5 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Moderate Environmental Group Now Leans Left</div><div>Z.2005.05 -12 Roy Spencer</div><div>Left-Leaning Donors Skewing Climate Change Research</div><div>
</div><div>696heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/16913.pdf</div><div>697 “Henry I. Miller M.D. (…) is a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover</div><div>Institution and an adjunct fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.</div><div>Sandy Szwarc is a contributing editor to Tech Central Station and a member of the</div><div>National Council Against Health Fraud and the Society for Risk Analysis.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>141</div><div>Z.2005.06698</div><div>Z.2005.06-1a Banner</div><div>… | NO CONSENSUS ON GLOBAL WARMING Meme-03</div><div>Z.2005.06-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Alaska Disputes EPA Mercury Guidelines</div><div>Z.2005.06-2 Quarter-page ad</div><div>The SIXTH ANNUAL FREEDOM 21 CONFERENCE</div><div>‘”This year’s program is designed like building blocks to show how sustainable</div><div>development policies erode the principles of freedom in every area of life,” says</div><div>program chairman, Tom DeWeese.’</div><div>Z.2005.06-5 Sterling Burnett</div><div>Oil Refineries Not Damaging Houston’s Air Quality</div><div>Z.2005.06-8 James M. Taylor</div><div>Indiana Bill Would Ban State Agencies from Tightening EPA</div><div>Standards</div><div>Z.2005.06-9 Marlo Lewis</div><div>EPA, State AGs Argue Climate Change in Appellate Court</div><div>
</div><div>698heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/17187.pdf</div><div>Z.2005.06-14 James M. Taylor</div><div>Survey Shows Climatologists Are Split on Global Warming</div><div>Alarmist “consensus” does not exist</div><div> A survey of climatologists from more than 20 nations has revealed scientists</div><div>are evenly split on whether humans are responsible for changes in global</div><div>climate. Meme-03</div><div> The findings refute699 a widely reported study by a California “Gender and</div><div>Science” professor700 who claimed that, based on her personal examination of</div><div>928 scientific papers on the issue, every single one reached the conclusion that</div><div>global warming is real and primarily caused by humans.</div><div>Professor Claims Scientific Unanimity701</div><div> In December 2004, Dr. Naomi Oreskes of the University of California at San</div><div>Diego received widespread media attention for claiming her review of scientific</div><div>literature showed scientists were in unanimous agreement that global warming is</div><div>occurring and is being caused primarily by humans.</div><div> In an article titled “Undeniable Global Warming,” Oreskes wrote in the</div><div>December 26 Washington Post, “There is a scientific consensus on the fact that</div><div>Earth’s climate is heating up and human activities are part of the reason. We</div><div>need to stop repeating nonsense about the uncertainty of global warming and</div><div>start talking seriously about the right approach to address it.”</div><div>Climatologists Dispute Oreskes</div><div> The May 1 London Telegraph, however, noted Oreskes’ “unequivocal</div><div>conclusions immediately raised suspicions among other academics, who knew of</div><div>many papers that dissented from the pro-global warming line.” The newspaper</div><div>reported that Dr. Benny Peiser, a senior lecturer in the science faculty at</div><div>Liverpool John Moores University, “decided to conduct his own analysis of the</div><div>same set of 1,000 documents [cited by Oreskes]—and concluded that only one</div><div>third backed the consensus view, while only 1 percent did so explicitly.”702</div><div>
</div><div>699 No, neither Peiser nor Bray did that.</div><div>700 Taylor denigrated an award-winning scholar and then relied on Peiser. Oreskes</div><div>was an exploration geologist before her Stanford PhD in geosciences and science</div><div>history and is Professor of History and Science Studies at UCSD.</div><div>history.ucsd.edu/people/faculty/oreskes-naomi.html</div><div>Calling her a Professor of “Gender and Science” is an obvious, purposeful attempt</div><div>to attack her credibility with the E&CN audience.” When she has spoken at</div><div>Stanford, members of the National Academy of Sciences take time to hear her.</div><div>701 Consensus is not unanimity and she did not claim the latter. She knows better.</div><div>Taylor tries to conflate the study with views of scientists, who have a strong</div><div>consensus, but no unanimity.</div><div>702 Peiser was a social (sports) anthropologist at a low-ranked UK school.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benny_Peiser</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>142</div><div> The London Times then reported on Professor Dennis Bray, of Germany’s</div><div>GKSS National Research Centre. Bray surveyed hundreds of international</div><div>climate scientists, asking the question, “To what extent do you agree or disagree</div><div>that climate change is mostly the result of anthropogenic causes?” Bray received</div><div>530 responses from climatologists in 27 different countries.</div><div> With a value of 1 indicating “strongly agree” and a value of 7 indicating</div><div>“strongly disagree,” Bray reported the average of the 530 responses was 3.62,</div><div>almost right down the middle. More climatologists “strongly disagreed” than</div><div>“strongly agreed” that climate change is mostly attributable to humans.</div><div>“The results, i.e. the mean of 3.62, seem to suggest that consensus is not all that</div><div>strong,” Bray reported in his findings. “Results of surveys of climate scientists</div><div>themselves indicate the possibility that Oreskes’ conclusion is not as obvious as</div><div>stated.”703</div><div>Journals Swayed by Politics</div><div>Lorne Gunter, a columnist for the Canadian journal National Post, was more</div><div>blunt in his assessment of the survey.704</div><div> “It’s a long way from a consensus backing the most extreme global warming</div><div>scenarios, as environmentalists and UN officials would have us believe,”</div><div>observed Gunter.</div><div> “Interestingly but hardly surprisingly, Dr. Bray has had trouble getting his</div><div>findings published. Science magazine turned down even a letter-to-the-editor</div><div>from him,” Gunter added. “That’s doubly galling because back in December</div><div>
</div><div>His study got whittled down to nothing, as he was finally forced to admit.</div><div>“Peiser says he withdrew his criticism in March this year.”(2006) --Media Watch.</div><div>“Peiser obviously doesn’t know the difference between consensus and uncertainty,</div><div>between different kinds of uncertainty, or between research on climate and</div><div>research on climate policy.” - Sylvia Tognetti.</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-journal-publishes-plagiarized-paper pp.7-8.</div><div>703 Even professional poll designers make errors, and Bray and von Storch were</div><div>not professionals. See comm.stanford.edu/faculty/krosnick for studies.</div><div>The 2003 Bray/von Storch survey was not well designed: the question was</div><div>ambiguous and the online poll arrangement allowed for gaming.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/a-statistical-analysis-of-theconsensus</div><div>I think they did a better job in August 2008:</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change</div><div>‘To the question "How convinced are you that most of recent or near future</div><div>climate change is, or will be, a result of anthropogenic causes?" the responses were</div><div>34.6% very much agree, 48.9% agreeing to a large extent, 15.1% to a small extent,</div><div>and 1.35% not agreeing at all.”’</div><div>704 Why does Lorne Gunter’s opinion matter? He is no scientist, but he has a long</div><div>history of opinions, www.desmogblog.com/search/node/lorne%20gunter .</div><div>Science didn’t hesitate for a second to print a discreditable paper by Dr. Naomi</div><div>Oreskes of UC San Diego in which she claimed that in her analysis of 928</div><div>abstracts from peer-reviewed climate research papers, ‘Remarkably, none of the</div><div>papers disagreed with the consensus position.’” Concluded Gunter, “Actually,</div><div>were Dr. Oreskes’ assertion of unanimity true, it might only prove how totally</div><div>co-opted the peer journals have become by enviro group-think and how willing</div><div>they are to censor dissenting views in an effort to preserve and polish the notion</div><div>of worldwide scientific consensus.”</div><div>This was a direct and false attack on Oreskes. IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2005.06-16 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Half-Baked Alaska</div><div>‘Brian Hartman and Gerd Wendler, of the Alaska-taxpayer-funded Alaska</div><div>Climate Research Center, have written extensively on this subject. …</div><div>“When analyzing the total time period from 1951-2001, warming is observed,</div><div>however the 25-year trend analyses before 1976 (1951-1975) and thereafter</div><div>(1977-2001) both display cooling.” …</div><div>Alaskan Climate Cooling</div><div>That’s right. The mean Alaskan temperature705 has been declining for the past</div><div>quarter-century. …It’s a double shame because the known behavior of Alaskan</div><div>climate is not unusual by historical standards, and even shows a net cooling in</div><div>the past 25 years— the so-called era of human warming.’</div><div>
</div><div>705 This argument is subtle, statistically. Michaels over-interprets the paper, which</div><div>notes that any cooling trend was not statistically significant. Alaska is a large</div><div>region with complex climate and high variability. See</div><div>data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/maps , select 1977-2005, and Annual or especially</div><div>Winter. The strongest warming is in Winter, as expected.</div><div>climate.gi.alaska.edu/ResearchProjects/Hartmann%20and%20Wendler%202005.p</div><div>df climate.gi.alaska.edu/ClimTrends/Change/TempChange.html</div><div>Chip Knappenberger, who works for Michaels, mentioned Hartman.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/04/kristof-on-the-apocalypse</div><div>Both Hartman and Wendler join the discussion in comments at:</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/08/antarctica-snowfall</div><div>How many elected officials have the time to find the article and understand it?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>143</div><div>Z.2005.06-18 Book Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Solar Power: Too Good to Be True</div><div>The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won’t Run the World (second edition)</div><div>by Howard C. Hayden $20.36 paper, 281 pages Vales Lake Publisher LLC</div><div>January 2005.</div><div>706</div><div>Z.2005.06-19 James M. Taylor</div><div>Welcome, New Readers!</div><div>“If this is your first issue of Environment & Climate News,</div><div>you are probably one of the 8,500 mayors, city council members, village</div><div>presidents, and county officials added to the complimentary mailing list …</div><div>Environment & Climate News is a monthly publication providing the latest news</div><div>on environmental science and public policy issues.</div><div>What makes Environment & Climate News unique is the publication’s focus on</div><div>state and local governments.”</div><div>Z.2005.06-19a Heartland</div><div>Circulation Report</div><div>Most issues are sent to elected officials, free.</div><div>
</div><div>706 MAS2009 pp.99-101. The one book of his I read was exceptionally poor.</div><div>Maybe this one is better. Vales Lake is Hayden.</div><div>Z.2005.07707</div><div>Z.2005.07-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>FBI: Eco Extremists Are Top Domestic Terror Threat</div><div>2005.07-2 ALEC708</div><div>– full-page advertisement</div><div>Annual 32nd Meeting</div><div>2005.07 -9 Sallie Baliunas</div><div>Recent Global Warmth Is Natural, Benefits Humans</div><div>Z.2005.07-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Washington State to Follow California on Auto CO2 Emissions</div><div>2005.07-13 S.T. Karnick</div><div>Civilization and its Malcontents</div><div>Full page book review of Michael Crichton’s State of Fear. §Y.2</div><div>
</div><div>707heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/17359.pdf</div><div>708 ALEC is not a nonpartisan entity.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>144</div><div>Issue 2005.08</div><div>709</div><div>2005.08-1 Banner</div><div>CLIMATOLOGISTS SAY NO GLOBAL WARMING CONSENSUS</div><div>Meme-03</div><div>2005.08-2 Full-page Advertisement for Natural Gas</div><div>American Natural Gas: Essential Energy</div><div>“Congress must encourage responsible energy development by opening more</div><div>lands in the West and off our coasts so that natural gas can continue to be an</div><div>important part of our nation’s energy mix. Let your representatives know how</div><div>important natural gas continues to be to your community.”</div><div>2005.08-6 Alan Caruba710</div><div>Climatologists Reject Media Claims of Global Warming Consensus</div><div>“Leading climatologists spent the month of June fighting false proclamations</div><div>from non-scientists claiming scientists have reached agreement that catastrophic</div><div>global warming is occurring.” Meme-03</div><div>These 711 included Fred Singer, George Taylor,712 Myron Ebell,713 Jan</div><div>Veizer (“one of Canada’s top earth scientists”),714 BennyPeiser.715</div><div>
</div><div>709heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/17585.pdf</div><div>710 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Caruba</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alan_Caruba PR advisor</div><div>711 “Leading climatologists” have recent history of good climate research articles</div><div>in credible, high-impact peer-reviewed scientific journals. None of these do.</div><div>Singer is not a climatologist and has few such publications in last 20 years, §C.2.</div><div>712 George Taylor is a climatologist, has written papers, but is hardly a leader.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=George_Taylor%28Oregon_State_Univer</div><div>sity%29</div><div>713 Myron Ebell studied philosophy, political theory and history, works at CEI.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Myron_Ebell</div><div>714 Veizer is an emeritus geology professor.</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/jan-veizer</div><div>715 Benny Peiser is a social (sports) anthropologist.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Benny_Peiser</div><div>2005.08-8 Jay Book Review by Lehr, PhD</div><div>A Book for the Weather-Child in All of Us</div><div>Review of Skywatch West: The Complete Weather Guide</div><div>by Richard A. Keen Fulcrum Publishing, August 2004</div><div>“Keen’s 30-page chapter on climate change is the best in print. With a child-like</div><div>ignorance of political distortion, Keen explains climate in complete, objective</div><div>terms with a clear analysis of facts and trends, science and speculation that prove</div><div>he has no allegiance to anything but unadulterated accuracy. The chasm that</div><div>exists between politically motivated climate change scare-mongering and</div><div>scientific reality is vast. Were excerpts of this chapter to be read by the entire</div><div>U.S. population, a few dozen environmental advocacy groups might go out of</div><div>business for lack of financial support….</div><div>After considering the future of El Niños, 200-year sun cycles, a doubling of CO2</div><div>levels from pre-industrial levels of 280ppm to about 500ppm by century’s end,</div><div>and a neutralization of all the potential feedback effects, that would likely leave</div><div>us about half-a degree warmer than we are today.716</div><div>2005.08-19 Heartland half-page advertisement (appears very often)</div><div>Crichton is RIGHT! IRS-0E See Fig. W.4.1 for occurrences.</div><div>
</div><div>716 If we ignore most of mainstream science we get different answers. Keen was a</div><div>meteorology instructor or adjunct Professor. at U of Colorado.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>145</div><div>Z.2005.10717</div><div>Z.2005.10-1 Banner, starts 49%/22%</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News and 22% say it has</div><div>influenced their opinion or led to a change in public policy!” IRS-5L</div><div>Z.2005.10-1 Sterling Burnett</div><div>Recent Hurricanes Not Caused by Warming, Scientists Conclude</div><div>Hurricanes are rare enough that it takes time to show statistical</div><div>significance, so this is still being argued, but it is well-understood that</div><div>hurricanes ought to be made stronger by warmer water.</div><div>“Scientists conclude” really means “a few scientists we know, with whom</div><div>many others disagree.” Heartland’s coverage of events in the Gulf is</div><div>instructive. This and Z.2005.10-9 emphasize that hurricanes have nothing</div><div>to do with global warming, but neither mention Bush administration’s</div><div>handling of Katrina.</div><div>718</div><div>Compare with later treatment of the 2010 oil spill (Z.2010.08-1),</div><div>effectively treated as a natural disaster and the primary emphasis is</div><div>criticism of the Obama administration.</div><div>
</div><div>717heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/17793.pdf</div><div>718en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina</div><div>Z.2005.10-6 Richard Pombo (R-CA), Jim Gibbons(R-NV)</div><div>House Committee Leaders Issue Mercury Report</div><div>Science shows scare campaigns unwarranted, study says</div><div>“Mercury is a naturally occurring element that is ubiquitous in the environment.</div><div>Most of the mercury existing in the environment is released through natural</div><div>processes. Thus, we are all exposed to trace amounts of mercury no matter what</div><div>levels are emitted through human activity, including power plant emissions.”</div><div>Z.2005.10-9 Dennis Byrne719</div><div>Leading Hurricane Experts Downplay Global Warming</div><div>Natural cycles, not warming temperatures, drive hurricane</div><div>fluctuations, scientists say</div><div>Z.2005.10-10 S. Fred Singer</div><div>New Data Cast Doubt on Alarmist Warming Predictions</div><div>See §Y.1. Singer had long relied on UAH’s erroneous claims of cooling to</div><div>reject global warming. More errors were found by the RSS team and</div><div>published in Science. UAH numbers finally came into better alignment</div><div>with others. At the same time, problems with radiosondes had been</div><div>documented August 2005. Spencer and Christy had been wrong all along,</div><div>RSS had been right. This is all dismissed as minor change. Meme-38</div><div>“The satellite data still suggest warming well below the levels the alarmists</div><div>trumpet. Real-world data, as opposed to theoretical models, continue to point to</div><div>a modest warming that humanity can easily adapt to.”</div><div>IAIN MURRAY COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE”</div><div>Quotes are given by Christy, Spencer, Michaels, and Reason ‘s Ronald Bailey.</div><div>Z.2005.10-20 Edited by Joseph L. Bast and Dennis Byrne</div><div>Emerging Issues 2005, The Heartland Institute, 2005</div><div>Penetrating analysis of many of the major public policy issues of the</div><div>day, written by28 of the nation’s leading experts!</div><div>“2. Environment</div><div>James M. Taylor, Environment & Climate News</div><div>Jim Johnston, The Heartland Institute</div><div>S. Fred Singer, Science and Environmental Policy Project</div><div>Wendell Cox, Wendell Cox Consultancy</div><div>Jay Lehr, The Heartland Institute”</div><div>
</div><div>719 “Dennis Byrne is a Chicago-based writer and columnist.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>146</div><div>Z.2005.11720</div><div>Z.2005.11-1</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News and 22% say it has</div><div>influenced their opinion or led to a change in public policy!” IRS-5L</div><div>Z.2005.11-1a Steve Milloy</div><div>U.S. Senate Squelches Mercury Panic</div><div>Z.2005.11-6 Richard Pombo, Jim Gibbons, excerpt by Heartland</div><div>Pombo, Gibbons Document Declining Mercury Exposure</div><div>Z.2005.11-10 Steve Milloy</div><div>Katrina Exposes Media’s Global Warming Bias</div><div>Z.2005.11 -10 James M. Taylor</div><div>Mars Is Warming, NASA Scientists Report</div><div>Data coincide with increasing solar output</div><div>‘Solar Link Possible</div><div>Scientists are not sure whether the Martian warming is entirely due to Marsspecific</div><div>forces or may be the result of other forces, such as increasing solar</div><div>output, which would explain much of the recent asserted warming of the Earth as</div><div>well. Sallie Baliunas, chair of the Science Advisory Board at the George C.</div><div>Marshall Institute, said, “Pluto, like Mars, is also undergoing warming.”</div><div>However, Baliunas speculated it is “likely not the sun but long-term processes on</div><div>Mars and Pluto” causing the warming. However, until more information is</div><div>gathered, Baliunas said, it is difficult to know for sure. Meme-52, Meme-19</div><div>Pat Michaels, past president of the American Association of State</div><div>Climatologists and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, similarly expressed a</div><div>desire for more information about the Martian climate. “What is the internal</div><div>dynamic that is warming Mars?” asked Michaels. “Given the fact that there are</div><div>not a lot of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions on Mars, and given the fact</div><div>that new research indicates that 10 to 30 percent estimated conservatively of</div><div>Earth’s recent warming is due to increased solar output, the Martian warming</div><div>may support that new research. …</div><div>Models May Be Wrong</div><div>The new research mentioned by Michaels is the October 2 release of findings by</div><div>Duke University scientists that “at least 10 to 30 percent of global warming</div><div>
</div><div>720heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/17987.pdf</div><div>measured during the past two decades may be due to increased solar output</div><div>rather than factors such as increased heat absorbing carbon dioxin gas released</div><div>by various human activities.” Meme-01</div><div>“The problem is that Earth’s atmosphere</div><div>is not in thermodynamic equilibrium with the sun,” Duke associate research</div><div>scientist Nicola Scafetta …”</div><div>Iain Murray, senior fellow and global warming specialist at the Competitive</div><div>Enterprise Institute, said the Mars warming adds another level of uncertainty to</div><div>claims that the Earth’s modest recent warming is a result of human activity.’</div><div>This is a classic good PR for doubt-creation.</div><div>While Murray might actually believe this,721 Baliunas at least trained as an</div><div>astrophysicist and should know better.</div><div>Z.2005.11 -12 Patrick Michaels</div><div>Real-World Data Contradict Hurricane Alarmism</div><div>
</div><div>721 cei.org/expert/iain-murray holds an MBA, with no obvious formal background</div><div>in physics or astrophysics. Still, he is labeled a global warming specialist, but on</div><div>this topic, fakexpert seems appropriate.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/1</div><div>4/12</div><div>147</div><div>Z.2005.12722</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-1 Banner</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News</div><div>!</div><div>”</div><div>723</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-</div><div>4 Michael Crichton (09/28/05 testimony to Senate EPW)</div><div>Crichton Tells Senate: Scientific Standards Must Not Be Relaxed for</div><div>Warming Predictions “Mann’s work has since been dismissed by scientists around the world who</div><div>subscribe to global warming.</div><div>”</div><div>Crichton appeals to unnamed “scientists,” but Mann has won various</div><div>awards for his work.724</div><div> Crichton’s opinions were worse than worthless.</div><div>In Wikipedia we find:</div><div>“At Harvard he developed the belief that all diseases, including heart attacks, are</div><div>direct effects of a patient's state of mind. He later wrote: "We cause our diseases.</div><div>We are directly responsible for any illness that happens to us."[16] Eventually he</div><div>came to believe in auras, astral projection, and clairvoyance.”725</div><div>So, he trained in anthropology and then got an M.D., but did little research</div><div>.</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-</div><div>9 James Hoare</div><div>Ignoring Science, San Francisco Considers Mercury Warning</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-</div><div>9</div><div>a James Hoare</div><div>Mercury in Fish Not Dangerous, Study Shows</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>U.S. Oil Shale Deposits May Be Tapped Soon726</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-12 Michael Fumento</div><div>Oil Sand Becoming More Economical</div><div>Z.2005.12</div><div>-16 Richard W. Pombo, Jim Gibbons, excerpts by Heartland</div><div>Report: Mercury Scare Campaigns Unfounded</div><div>
</div><div>722heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/18139.pdf</div><div>723 Perhaps someone told them not to advertise changing legislators’ minds?</div><div>724 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E.Mann</div><div>725 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton</div><div>726 Taylor ignores the serious issue of water. Wyoming/Colorado is not Alberta.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>148</div><div>Z.2006 10 issues</div><div>Z.2006.01727</div><div>Z.2006.01-1 Banner</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News and 22% say it has</div><div>influenced their opinion or led to a change in public policy!”728</div><div>Z.2006.01-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>California Air Cleaner than Ever</div><div>“New data from California’s coastal cities show air quality in 2005 was</div><div>remarkably high compared to years past, continuing a long-term trend. …</div><div>The interior San Joaquin region also showed significant air quality improvement.</div><div>The region violated federal ozone standards 72 times in 2005, compared to 109</div><div>times in 2004.”</div><div>Taylor does not live in the Central Valley and seems not to know</div><div>California geography or conditions very well, Z.2004.02-11. E&CN</div><div>downplays particulate problems. The Wall Street Journal noted the10</div><div>worst US cities for short-term particulate pollution729 from US Lung</div><div>Association data for Ozone Short-term particle and Year-round particle</div><div>pollution, 730</div><div> of which 8, 6 and 6 respectively are in California.731</div><div>Z.2006.01-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Future of Coal Is Green, Say Montana and West Virginia</div><div>Economic, environmental dividends from coal</div><div>Z.2006.01-10 Patrick Michaels</div><div>Warming Likely to Have Modest Effect on Sea Level, If Any</div><div>
</div><div>727heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/18260.pdf</div><div>728 The 22% claim disappeared after this one. Perhaps someone realized that it</div><div>might not be a good idea to tout this so publicly and still claim no lobbying.</div><div>729 Kris Maher, “Pittsburgh Tries to Clear the Air on Pollution,” 01/06/12, p.A3.</div><div>730 stateoftheair.newslinevine.com/ 01/06/12.</div><div>731 This is hardly for lack of effort by California, which Taylor always denigrates.</div><div>Z.2006.02732</div><div>Z.2006.02-1 Banner</div><div>“49% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News!”</div><div>This persists through Z.2006.12, when it changes to 56%.</div><div>Z.2006.02-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Democrats Lead Fight Against West Virginia Wind Farms733</div><div>Z.2006.02-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>California Utilities Commission Approves Costly Solar Plan734</div><div>Z.2006.02-7 Joel Schwartz</div><div>EPA Proposes Cut in Airborne Particulate Matter Levels</div><div>Z.2006.02-9 James M. Taylor</div><div>Six Suspects Arrested for String of Eco-Terrorist Attacks</div><div>Fire-bombings show increasing threat of domestic eco-terrorism</div><div>Z.2006.02-11 James Hoare</div><div>Global Warming Simultaneously Baking, Freezing Europe, Activist</div><div>Alarmists Claim</div><div>Z.2006.02-15 Marlo Lewis</div><div>Senate Approves $5 Billion in New Oil Company Taxes</div><div>Oil company profits expected to fall in 2006</div><div>Z.2006.02-17 Willie Soon</div><div>735</div><div>Fish Is Good for You</div><div>“Such mercury fears are unfounded in science.”</div><div>
</div><div>732heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/18453.pdf</div><div>733 This is a rarity. Taylor seldom praises Democrats.</div><div>734 Of course, Schwarzenegger was not considered a real Republican, but a RINO.</div><div>735 Willie Soon is an astrophysicist.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>149</div><div>Z.2006.04736</div><div>Z.2006.04 -4 Heartland, 05-18, 06-18; 2006.07-18, 10-17</div><div>Circulation report.</div><div>See §X.2 for circulation chronology.</div><div>Z.2006.04-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Revolutionary Mercury Reduction Technology May Be At Hand</div><div>Z.2006.04-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Illinois Governor Ignores Science, Pushes Mercury Cuts</div><div>Z.2006.04-9 James M. Taylor</div><div>Congress Considers Tougher Eco-Terror Laws</div><div>Z.2006.04 -10 Joel Schwartz</div><div>Health Risks of Ozone Are Exaggerated</div><div>Z.2006.04 -11 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA’s New NOx Rules Could Increase Urban Smog Problem</div><div>Short-term effect may be paraded as excuse for even more regulation</div><div>Z.2006.04-15 Reason half-page advertisement</div><div>At Reason We Stand Up for Freedom</div><div>Reason stands up for freedom, including the freedom for tobacco</div><div>companies to addict children as customers, Fig. F.4</div><div>Z.2006.04-17 James M. Taylor</div><div>Study Finds High Failure Rate for Renewable Energy Projects</div><div>
</div><div>736heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/18802.pdf</div><div>Z.2006.05737</div><div>Z.2006.05 -6 James M. Taylor</div><div>California Considers Smoking Bans for Cars, Apartments</div><div>‘Harmless to Others Outdoors</div><div>Even if secondhand smoke health fears proved justified, such smoke</div><div>has very little impact on humans outdoors. “No studies exist that</div><div>show that exposure outdoors leads to any increased risk of tobaccoassociated</div><div>illness,” said David Howard, a spokesman for R.J.</div><div>Reynolds, for the January 27 New York Times story.’</div><div>Z.2006.05 -6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Maryland, Virginia Reject Smoking Bans</div><div>Z.2006.05-6 Heartland quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Smoker’s Lounge</div><div>“The place to go for sound science,</div><div>economics, and legal commentary on tobacco</div><div>issues.</div><div>This “issue suite” cuts through the propaganda</div><div>and exaggeration of anti-smoking groups by</div><div>giving you access to the best available</div><div>research and commentary from scores of</div><div>independent research organizations,</div><div>publications, and government sources.”</div><div>Z.2006.05-18 circulation claims</div><div>“900 classroom distribution”</div><div>Is this a positive or negative image?</div><div>Joe Camel may have died, but Heartland</div><div>kept trying.</div><div>
</div><div>737heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/18984.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>150</div><div>Z.2006.05 -11 Louise Butler</div><div>Global Warming: Perfect Storm of Media Sensationalism (Crichton)</div><div>“State of Fear does not escape the intellectual problems of a work of fiction, but</div><div>it is still made of sterner stuff. Crichton presents global warming as the faulty</div><div>creation of environmental extremists, funded by people with marginal</div><div>understanding of science and promoted by entertainment-oriented media. The</div><div>book offers footnotes, charts, and references to bolster the conflicting dialog of</div><div>the characters.”</div><div>Z.2006.05-10a H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Are Polar Bears Dying?738</div><div>“A new study by Dr. David Legates, Delaware’s State Climatologist and director</div><div>of the University of Delaware’s Center for Climatic Research, throws cold water</div><div>on the claim that global warming threatens to cause the extinction of polar bears.</div><div>Meme-37</div><div>Scare Unwarranted</div><div>As part of his study titled Climate Science: Climate Change and its Impacts,</div><div>expected at press time to be released in April of this year, Legates reviewed</div><div>assertions by environmental alarmists …”</div><div>Legates is now the former State Climatologist and former director.739</div><div>A critique by serious scientist says:740</div><div>“The report is filled with personal assertions that reflect a very selective and</div><div>biased look at the available scientific results, skeptically treating and dismissing</div><div>scientific results that are broadly accepted while uncritically accepting very</div><div>weakly supported claims of a natural origin of virtually all variations and</div><div>changes that have been observed. It is seemingly aimed at refuting “climate</div><div>alarmists” (who are mainly not identified, but seem to include the media and</div><div>representatives of environmental groups) and in doing so sets up a lot of</div><div>strawmen that gives him an excuse to put in a couple of contradictory references.</div><div>In most cases, however, the claims he shoots at are neither valid nor at all central</div><div>to the key scientific findings regarding human-induced global warming.”</div><div>
</div><div>738 www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st285.pdf Originally published by NCPA.</div><div>739 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Legates</div><div>740 www.climatesciencewatch.org/2006/06/11/refuting-a-global-warming-denier</div><div>www.climate.org/about/maccracken-bio.html</div><div>Z.2006.06741</div><div>Z.2006.06-10 Marlo Lewis742</div><div>Time’s Climate Change Issue Rife with Deception</div><div>Special report exemplifies the decline of ethics in environment news</div><div>coverage</div><div>‘“Time’s special report ... is not a report but a diatribe— one-sided</div><div>advocacy from start to finish. Scientists who take a non-alarmist view</div><div>of global warming do not get a word in edgewise.”’</div><div>Z.2006.06-12 H. Sterling Burnett, PhD</div><div>Maryland Legislature Forces Governor into Regional Greenhouse Gas</div><div>Initiative</div><div>‘“Other analysts view the Maryland legislature’s actions as more</div><div>hysteric than historic, warning that Maryland’s citizens may come to</div><div>regret the day the law was passed.”</div><div>Z.2006.06-19 James M. Taylor</div><div>No Blood for Oil</div><div>Fuel economy mandates taking unnecessary toll on American lives</div><div>
</div><div>741heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/19139.pdf</div><div>742 Marlo Lewis (EMAIL) is a senior fellow, specializing in global warming and</div><div>energy policy, at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.</div><div>cei.org/expert/marlo-lewis-jr</div><div>He has a BA in Political Science and PhD in Government.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marlo_Lewis</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>151</div><div>Z.2006.07</div><div>743</div><div>Z.2006.07-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>States Split on Mercury Standards</div><div>Z.2006.07-1a H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Pennsylvania Toughens Eco-Terror Law</div><div>Z.2006.07-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Arizona, Colorado Governors Veto Factory Emissions Bills</div><div>Z.2006.07-4 Joel Schwartz</div><div>Finding Better Ways to Achieve Cleaner Air</div><div>“Air pollution regulation could even have been left to the states altogether,</div><div>without imposing federal control.</div><div>Z.2006.07-14 CARTOON - GORE II</div><div>“He’s back and he’s not taking NO for an answer!”.</div><div>Z.2006.07-15 GLOBAL SATELLITE TEMPERATURES ~§Y.1</div><div>IS THIS GLOBAL WARMING? MAY 2006 (CHANGE)</div><div>The previous message “No sign of global warming” had never once been</div><div>true since 1999, even by low UAH numbers. The new question invited the</div><div>answer “NO,” without making the claim. They still ignored the UAH</div><div>trends that showed the answer was YES. Heartland then added this</div><div>irrelevant graph, which implied a message that</div><div>temperatures have varied before. It remained</div><div>constant from issue to issue and had zero connection</div><div>with the 1979-present satellite era. Meme-38</div><div>Z.2006.07-18 Elizabeth Whalen</div><div>WHO Tobacco Document Relies on Half-Truths, Omissions744</div><div>
</div><div>743heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/19342.pdf</div><div>Z.2006.08745</div><div>Z.2006.08 -3 James M. Taylor</div><div>CO2 Cap Would Hurt Calif. Economy</div><div>‘“A.B. 32 is likely to cause ‘leakage’ of industry to states and countries with no</div><div>mandatory emission caps, resulting in job losses and no net reduction in</div><div>[greenhouse gases].</div><div>MARGO THORNING, PH.D.</div><div>SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF ECONOMIST</div><div>AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CAPITAL FORMATION’</div><div>746</div><div>A.B.32 was then under consideration, passed in September 2006.</div><div>Z.2006.08-14 Richard S. Lindzen</div><div>Global Warming</div><div>“Secondly, given that the question of human attribution largely cannot be</div><div>resolved, its use in promoting visions of disaster constitutes nothing so much as</div><div>a bait-and-switch scam.”</div><div>
</div><div>744 Whalen is negative on cigarettes, but seemingly supportive of the various other</div><div>forms of tobacco. On same page is a “Smoker’s Lounge” ad. See the real report:</div><div>www.who.int/tobacco/communications/events/wntd/2006/Tfi_Rapport.pdf</div><div>745heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/19489.pdf</div><div>746 ExxonMobil was a major funder of ACCF, MAS2010 p.94.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>152</div><div>Z.2006.08-16 Joseph Bast</div><div>Gore Movie Is Gorgeous Propaganda, Misrepresentation747</div><div>‘At one point he compares scientists who disagree with him with apologists for</div><div>the tobacco industry. So what are we to make of (in alphabetical order) Dr. Tim</div><div>Ball at the University of Winnipeg, Dr. Robert Balling at Arizona State</div><div>University, Dr. Sallie Baliunas at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics,</div><div>Dr. Bob Carter at James Cook University in Australia, Dr. Randall Cerveny at</div><div>Arizona State University, Dr. John Christy at the University of Alabama, Dr.</div><div>Robert Davis at the University of Virginia, Dr. Christopher Essex at the</div><div>University of Western Ontario, Dr. Oliver Frauenfeld at the University of</div><div>Colorado, Dr. Wibjörn Karlèn at Stockholm University, and Dr. Christopher</div><div>Landsea at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)?</div><div>And what about Dr. David Legates at the University of Delaware, Dr. Henry</div><div>Linden at IIT, Dr. Richard Lindzen at MIT, Dr. Ross McKitrick at the University</div><div>of Guelph, Dr. Patrick Michaels at the University of Virginia, Dr. Dick Morgan</div><div>at the University of Exeter, Dr. Tim Peterson at Carleton University, Dr. Roger</div><div>Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado, Dr. Eric Posmentier at Dartmouth</div><div>College, Dr. Willie Soon at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Dr.</div><div>Roy Spencer at the University of Alabama, and Dr. Boris Winterhalter at the</div><div>University of Helsinki?</div><div>All are respected authorities on climatology, working at respected universities,</div><div>who appear regularly in peer-reviewed science journals.</div><div>Do we want to put the incredible powers of the presidency of the United States</div><div>in the hands of what Eric Hoffer called a “true believer,” someone who ignores</div><div>evidence and opinions that contradict his faith?’</div><div>748</div><div>.</div><div>Z.2006.08-18 Deroy Murdock749</div><div>Eco-Misanthropes Want Better Living Through Mass Death</div><div>
</div><div>747 Real scientists thought otherwise.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/05/al-gores-movie /</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/10/convenient-untruths</div><div>748 Real climate experts regularly publish climate papers in credible peer-reviewed</div><div>journals and have their work stand up. few of these people do that. Of these, the 8</div><div>in Bold published papers via a friendly editor, Chris de Freitas leading to an</div><div>infamous incident that caused mass resignations:</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-prefer-pal-review-over-peer-review-chris-defreitas-pat-michaels-and-their-pals-1997-2003</div><div>749 “Deroy Murdock is a senior fellow with the Atlas Economic Research</div><div>Foundation in Arlington, Virginia.”</div><div>Z.2006.10750</div><div>Z.2006.10-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Calif. Passes Global Warming Measure</div><div>Z.2006.10-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>California Wind Power Worries Environmentalists</div><div>Z.2006.10-5a James M. Taylor</div><div>Taxpayers Asked to Subsidize Renewable Boondoggle</div><div>Z.2006.10 -8 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Are you an elected official looking for innovative ideas?</div><div>Join 541 elected officials who have already joined The Heartland</div><div>Institute’s Board of Legislative Advisors.” IRS-5L?</div><div>Having worked most of my professional life generating real</div><div>innovation (Bell Labs, Silicon Valley companies), I am</div><div>perplexed by claim of innovative ideas. Which are they?</div><div>Z.2006.10-11 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Drought Scare Goes Up in Smoke751</div><div>Z.2006.10-13 H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D.</div><div>Congressional Hearings Break ‘Hockey Stick’</div><div>The Wegman Report was an academic fraud created to mislead</div><div>Congress.752</div><div>Z.2006.10 -12 Joel Schwartz</div><div>“Environmental Activists Just Don’t Get It”</div><div>
</div><div>750heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/19741.pdf</div><div>751 The reader might fast-forward to Texas in 2011.</div><div>752 deepclimate.org/2010/09/26/strange-scholarship-wegman-report</div><div>The PDF is a 285-page dissection. One of Wegman’s papers has already been</div><div>retracted and GMU (which has long received big donations from Kochs, Scaife,</div><div>etc) is 23 months into an “investigation” that should have finished a year ago.</div><div>www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2010-11-21-climate-reportquestioned_N.htm</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>153</div><div>Z.2006.10 -14 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Earth’s Climate Is Always Warming or Cooling</div><div>“[T]here is only one valid conclusion from the failure of greenhouse theory to</div><div>explain the observations: The human contribution to global warming appears to</div><div>be quite small and natural climate factors are dominant.”</div><div>Z.2006.10-14 Brian Bishop</div><div>Skeptics Debate Credibility of Environmentalists’ Claims</div><div>“During the debate, novelist and medical doctor Michael Crichton was asked</div><div>how much evidence would be necessary to end the debate about predictions of</div><div>catastrophic climate change.” §Y.2</div><div>Z.2006.10 -20 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Want to reach … elected officials on renewable energy?</div><div>“Environment & Climate News is sent to every state and federal elected official</div><div>in the country (more than 8,500 of them), nearly 8,500 local elected officials,</div><div>plus environment reporters, subscribers, Heartland Institute members and</div><div>donors, and allies.”</div><div>“Cheaper than direct mail and far more effective!”</div><div>E&CN writes often on wind turbines and solar energy, almost always</div><div>negatively.753</div><div>
</div><div>753 Not all such projects make sense. but some work quite well, and of course,</div><div>anyone who knows anything about manufacturing economics knows that volume</div><div>needs to be built to bring costs down. The first transistors were really expensive.</div><div>Z.2006.11754</div><div>Z.2006.11-1a Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>BP Fined, Investigated for Environment, Safety Violations</div><div>It is rare for E&CN to criticize a petroleum company, but Cohen certainly</div><div>highlighted “Beyond Petroleum.”</div><div>Z.2006.11-1b Thomas Tanton</div><div>Warming Bill Jeopardizes Calif. Economy</div><div>Z.2006.11-5 Robert Bradley</div><div>‘Energy Independence’ Rallying Cry Promotes Isolationism</div><div>Z.2006.11-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>Climate Expert: We Have the Technology to Set Global Temperature</div><div>Warmer or Cooler</div><div>Interview with Pat Michaels.</div><div>Z.2006.11-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>Himalayan Glaciers Are Growing ...and Confounding Global</div><div>Warming Alarmists</div><div>
</div><div>754heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20088.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>154</div><div>Z.2006.11 -19 Review by Jay Lehr, PhD.755</div><div>Prying Open a Mind</div><div>Z.2006.11-14 Daniel R. Simmons, Esq</div><div>Elusive Particles of Truth: EPA’s Proposed PM 2.5 Regulations</div><div>“But despite more than three decades of continued air quality improvement, and</div><div>without compelling evidence of the need to do so, EPA wants to regulate a</div><div>certain type of pollution—particulate matter—more strictly than ever.”</div><div>How often has ALEC supported any EPA regulation (or those of</div><div>California, which are legally allowed to be more stringent)?</div><div>Z.2006.11 -20 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Want to reach … elected officials on mercury?</div><div>
</div><div>755 MAS2010f reviews this book, which Lehr (mostly) praises. Bethell is a</div><div>nonscientist with intense anti-science views, including using high school algebra</div><div>to argue against senior physicists that Special Relativity was wrong. The old</div><div>adage applies: "Keep an open mind – but not so open that your brain falls out"</div><div>Z.2006.12756</div><div>Z.2006.12-1 James Hoare</div><div>California Climate Coalition Can’t Agree on Implementation</div><div>Z.2006.12 -2 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Are you an elected official looking for innovative ideas?</div><div>‘“The Heartland Institute is a treasure trove of timely information. They do a</div><div>great job of getting information to you with their broad array of publications.”</div><div>Cindy Noe State Representative Indiana’</div><div>Z.2006.12-5 Kenneth P. Green</div><div>Bush Denies Plan to Cap Carbon Dioxide</div><div>Says adaptation and sequestration work better than emission caps</div><div>Z.2006.12-8 Quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years Meme-21</div><div>Z.2006.12-10 James Inhofe (excerpts by Heartland)</div><div>Climate Variance No Crisis, Says Senate Committee Chair</div><div>Z.2006.12-11 James Inhofe (republished by Heartland)</div><div>Inhofe Speech Ignites a Media Firestorm</div><div>Z.2006.12-16 John Dale Dunn M.D. J.D.</div><div>EPA Makes Mistakes in Proposed New Air Quality Standards</div><div>Z.2006.12-20 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Want to reach … elected officials on mercury?</div><div>
</div><div>756heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20263.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>155</div><div>Z.2007 10 issues</div><div>Z.2007.02757</div><div>Z.2007.02-1 Banner/subhead</div><div>“56% of legislators read Environmental & Climate News!”</div><div>This rose from 49%.</div><div>Z.2007.02-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Want to reach … elected officials on environment issues?</div><div>Z.2007.02-3 Michael Coulter</div><div>Presenting Science Without Bias A profile of Robert Ferguson</div><div>“After working on Capitol Hill for more than 25 years, which included stints as</div><div>chief of staff for two members of Congress, Ferguson founded the</div><div>Center for Science and Public Policy (CSPP) in 2003. His goal is to provide</div><div>congressional staffers with unbiased scientific information on environmental</div><div>issues that Congressmen need to make sound public policy decisions. …But it is</div><div>his love for scientific truth—the very impulse that guided him to start a nonprofit</div><div>organization rather than cashing in his Capitol Hill experience in the private</div><div>sector758—that gives him the strength to stand up to special-interest activist</div><div>groups.”</div><div>CSPP was a branch of Frontiers of Freedom, and FF/CSPP got substantial</div><div>Exxon funding759 Fig. K.1.1.</div><div>Ferguson later started SPPI, well-paid through CSCDGC, §K.3</div><div>To assess love of scientific truth, the reader might study the SPPI website.</div><div>
</div><div>757heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20526.pdf</div><div>758 He got paid $247K in 2009 and $321K in 2010,</div><div>759 MAS2010 p.93, 60. It also paired 501(c)(3) and 501(c)4.</div><div>Z.2007.02-6 James Hoare</div><div>Most States Are Satisfied with Federal Mercury Standard</div><div>‘“There is a great deal of science that undermines the assertion that mercury is</div><div>harming human health,” said Dr. Gilbert Ross, medical director for the American</div><div>Council on Science and Health.760</div><div>“The American populace is exposed to very little environmental mercury,” Ross</div><div>noted, “and the chances of mercury health harms are quite remote.</div><div>Individual states taking action against mercury are merely a public relations</div><div>move that will have absolutely no effect on public health.”</div><div>Restricting U.S. power plant emissions would have little impact on</div><div>environmental mercury levels anyway, Ross said.</div><div>“Most of our environmental mercury comes from other nations, mostly China</div><div>and the Pacific Rim. Power plant-generated mercury emissions in the U.S. are</div><div>quite minute by comparison,” said Ross.’</div><div>Z.2007.02-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>Warming Debate Not Over, Survey of Scientists Shows Meme-03</div><div>“A substantial number of environmental scientists and practitioners…”</div><div>A reader unfamiliar with NREP might be misled by its title and especially</div><div>by Taylor’s repeated use of “environmental scientists.”</div><div>He quotes National Registration of Environmental Professionals (NREP)</div><div>survey761 and Marlo Lewis (CEI). NREP is really for environmental</div><div>engineers and compliance people762 who work on local environmental</div><div>problems, not for climate scientists. Compare Taylor’s article with the</div><div>summary in Wikipedia, “82 percent think global warming is a real,</div><div>measurable, climactic trend currently in effect.”</div><div>
</div><div>760 MAS2010 p.51, 94 (Exxon funding). ACSH doesn’t like cigarettes, but seems</div><div>to approve of almost anything else that some might consider problems. Elizabeth</div><div>Whalen and John Dale Dunn of ACSH appear elsewhere in this report.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Council_on_Science_and_Health</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ACSH</div><div>761en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Registry_of_Environmental_Professionals</div><div>762 conference.nrep.org/call_for_speakers.html</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>156</div><div>Z.2007.02.8 Heartland on Monckton Letter</div><div>British Lord Demands End to Climate Science Censorship</div><div>“Lord Christopher Monckton, 3rd Viscount of Brenchley and a member of the</div><div>Upper House of the British legislature, 763 has sent a letter to Sens. Olympia</div><div>Snowe (R-ME) and John D. Rockefeller (D-WV) excoriating them for</div><div>attempting to strong-arm ExxonMobil into cutting off support for public interest</div><div>groups that question global warming alarmism. …</div><div>Monckton, a former science and technology advisor764 to British Prime Minister</div><div>Margaret Thatcher, .. Monckton’s open letter, edited for length, appears below.</div><div>…”</div><div>“You commend Britain’s Royal Society765</div><div>, once a learned body and now a mere</div><div>Left-leaning political pressure-group, …</div><div>Finally, you may wonder why it is that a member of the Upper House of the</div><div>United Kingdom legislature,…”</div><div>Heartland edited the original766 document, deleting the following section</div><div>quite relevant to the topics discussed in this report:</div><div>“In the circumstances, your comparison of Exxon’s funding of sceptical</div><div>scientists and groups with the former antics of the tobacco industry is</div><div>unjustifiable and unworthy of any credible elected representatives. Either</div><div>withdraw that monstrous comparison forthwith, or resign so as not to pollute the</div><div>office you hold.”</div><div>Monckton has been discredited numerous times,767 but Heartland promotes</div><div>him as a “global warming expert” to their readership.</div><div>This was apparently insufficient as seen in next article.</div><div>
</div><div>763en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Br</div><div>enchley Monckton has never been a member of the House of Lords.</div><div>764 There is no evidence of this claim, and much otherwise.</div><div>765 The RS is the oldest science society in the world. Monckton is a nonscientist.</div><div>766 www.ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20061212_monckton.pdf p.6</div><div>767 scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/12/monckton_debunks_monckton.php</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/monckton-tries-to-censor-john-abraham.html</div><div>www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jul/14/monckton-johnabraham</div><div>Z.2007.02-10 David Ridenour</div><div>Senators’ Inquisition Attempts to Stifle Science, Debate</div><div>“Nicolas Copernicus was condemned for suggesting that the sun, rather than the</div><div>Earth, was the center of our universe. …</div><div>Today, U.S. Sens. Olympia Snowe and John Rockefeller IV are engaging in</div><div>persecution of their own, attempting to silence dissenting voices. Just what do</div><div>they fear? … IRS-3E</div><div>Truth, Science Will Prevail</div><div>Scientific method isn’t about winning popularity contests. It’s also not about</div><div>being with the majority opinion. It isn’t supposed be determined by politics. It is</div><div>about attempting to limit bias or prejudice in the results.</div><div>Unfortunately, by attempting to cut off some of the funding for those who</div><div>contribute to the diversity of both the scientific and public policy debate, Sens.</div><div>Snowe and Rockefeller are attempting to bias the results.</div><div>They will fail, however, because funding from energy companies is not what is</div><div>fueling the vigorous climate change debate.</div><div>What is fueling the debate is a genuine, sincere difference of opinion.”</div><div>Ridenour’s degree is in political science and he is now President of</div><div>NCPPR, after a 25-year tenure as Vice president.</div><div>768</div><div>Unsurprisingly NCPPR has gotten ExxonMobil funding. 769</div><div> In fact, almost</div><div>all of the foundation funding identifiable then came from ExxonMobil.</div><div>Likewise, (Fig. F.4), NCPPR was able to obtain tobacco funding, so one</div><div>wonders how many children got addicted from NCPPR’s assistance. That</div><div>might be a question to ask of Mr. Ridenour for his impassioned defense of</div><div>science. Has NCPPR ever done much real science? Any?</div><div>
</div><div>768 www.nationalcenter.org/bios/ridenourd.html</div><div>www.eri-nonprofitsalaries.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=NPO.Summary&EIN=521226614</div><div>This is another family business, run by Amy and David Ridenour.</div><div>769 MAS2010 p.71, </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>157</div><div>Z.2007.02-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Little Ice Age May Return Soon, Russian Scientists Say</div><div>Solar cycles indicate recent warming may be coming to an end</div><div>“A gradual decline in global temperatures will begin by 2015, with temperatures</div><div>bottoming out in Little Ice Age conditions during a 60-year period beginning</div><div>around 2060, researchers with the Russian Academy of Sciences have</div><div>concluded.</div><div>Their finding contradicts predictions of global warming made in recent years by</div><div>some climate theorists.”</div><div>Some unnamed Russians770 ignore basic physics, but Taylor likes what they</div><div>say, as do Marlo Lewis and CSCDGC.771</div><div> Meme-04, Meme-01</div><div>Z.2007.02-12 James Inhofe address, #2 edited by Heartland</div><div>Senator Presents Scientific Case for Climate Realism</div><div>This is another part of an Inhofe address.</div><div>The idea of Inhofe presenting science is an interesting one.</div><div>Z.2007.02-13 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Princeton President Caving in to Global Warming Junk Science</div><div>“Princeton University President Shirley Tilghman appears to have embraced</div><div>“science by consensus and fear-mongering.” IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.02-13 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Eco-terrorism - Proof that little knowledge can be dangerous.</div><div>2007.02-20 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Are you an elected official looking for innovative ideas?</div><div>“Join 541 elected officials who have already joined The Heartland</div><div>Institute’s Board of Legislative Advisors.”</div><div>
</div><div>770 en.rian.ru/russia/20060825/53143686.html</div><div>Khabibullo Abdusamatov is a space scientist, not a climate scientist. According to</div><div>this, global cooling starts in 2012-2015. He rejects the well-understood physics of</div><div>greenhouse gases. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khabibullo_Abdusamatov</div><div>scienceblogs.com/stoat/2012/02/a_testable_prediction_by_a_nut.php</div><div>771 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/12/inhofes-last-stand/</div><div>Z.2007.03772</div><div>Z,2007.03-1 Banner</div><div>Z.2007.03-2 Want to reach … elected officials on environment issues?</div><div>Z.2007.03 -3 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Climate Alarmist Quits British Government</div><div>“Sir Nicholas Stern, author of a controversial October 2006 report alleging</div><div>global warming will wreak havoc on the global economy, on December 11</div><div>resigned his position…”</div><div>Quotes: Indur Goklany, Bjorn Lomborg, Myron Ebell.</div><div>Z.2007.03 -8 James Inhofe #3 address, edited by Heartland</div><div>Media Hype on Climate Change Is Nothing New: Inhofe</div><div>Z.2007.03 -10 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>What Explains the Increasing Fury of Global Warming Alarmists?</div><div>“What’s behind the shameless demagoguery and character assassination being</div><div>heaped on climate change “deniers”? What’s behind the chilling calls for</div><div>“Nuremberg trials” for dissenting scientists? Why has the Green rhetoric</div><div>escalated to lynch-mob proportions?” IRS-3E</div><div>Shows pictures of James Hansen773 and George Monbiot.</div><div>Z.2007.03 -10 Robert Whaples774</div><div>Economists See No Reason for Climate Change Alarm: Survey</div><div>
</div><div>772heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20649.pdf</div><div>773 Hansen cares about his grandchildren.</div><div>774 Robert Whaples (…) is chair of the Department of Economics at Wake Forest</div><div>University. This article was first published on the Tech Central Station Web site</div><div>(www.techcentral station.com) and draws on his article, “Do Economists Agree</div><div>on Anything? Yes,” in The Economists’ Voice 3 (9), November2006.</div><div>TechCentralStation was a disinformation website set up by DCI, specialists in</div><div>creating fronts and astroturf groups. MAS2010 p.76 has links.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tech_Central_Station</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>158</div><div>Z.2007.03 -12 Review by Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Careful Review of Science Refutes Global Warming Myths IRS-3E</div><div>I own this book and Singer’s earlier Hot Talk, Cold Science, which claimed</div><div>satellites (Spencer and Christy) proved no warming. In this one, a magical</div><div>cycle has appeared, warming exists, but is natural and will go away.</div><div>Meme-21 The main real constant is never, ever restrict CO2 emissions.</div><div>Z.2007.03 -20 Are you an elected official looking for innovative ideas?</div><div>“Join nearly 500 elected officials who have already joined The</div><div>Heartland Institute’s Board of Legislative Advisors.”</div><div>The earlier ones said “541.”</div><div>This one at least expanded the demographics.</div><div>Z.2007.04775</div><div>Z.2007.04 -2 Want to reach … elected officials on environment issues?</div><div>Z.2007.04 -1 Michael Coulter</div><div>IPCC Reduces Global Warming Projections</div><div>Z.2007.04 -6 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Heartland President Debunks Global Warming Myths</div><div>‘Joseph Bast, president of The Heartland Institute, gave a summary of the</div><div>current state of global warming science in a February 7 presentation to the</div><div>Nebraska Farm Bureau. Bast demonstrated the current global warming scare is</div><div>like prior environmental scares that were soundly debunked once sufficient</div><div>scientific data were gathered on the issues. IRS-3E Although global warming is</div><div>a scientifically controversial topic, Bast notes, scientists776 agree the warming to</div><div>date has been modest and that natural variability may well explain some or all of</div><div>it. Premature attempts to “do something now” will cause more harm than good,</div><div>particularly to American farmers, he notes.’</div><div>Farmers will get hurt early, as they have in Texas from the 2011 drought or</div><div>Mid-West floods. He did include a “Galileo” cartoon, p.7:</div><div>News item: world’s scientists are more than 90% confident warming is humandriven.</div><div>“What a shame! He was a smart guy, but the vast majority of his colleagues</div><div>reached a consensus his science was bad.”</div><div>“Who is that guy, anyway?</div><div>“Galileo!”</div><div>None of Heartland’s favorite “scientists” are Galileo.</div><div>Z.2007.04 -8 John Dale Dunn</div><div>Many States Devastated by Frigid Weather Meme-15</div><div>AGW has not eliminated winter.</div><div>
</div><div>775heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20824.pdf</div><div>776 The unnamed “scientists” appear often.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>159</div><div>Z.2007.04 -9 James M. Taylor</div><div>School District Rejects Gore Film</div><div>Actually, not. Although this story was presented in April 2007:777</div><div>“On January 9, 2007, the Federal Way Public School District temporarily</div><div>blocked its teachers from showing Vice President Al Gore's global warming</div><div>documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, without presenting a "credible, legitimate</div><div>opposing view." The order was passed after Frosty Hardison, a Federal Way</div><div>parent, complained about the movie's use in his daughter's class. Hardison was</div><div>quoted in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer citing Biblical predictions of the age and</div><div>end of the world, and saying neither condones Al Gore's view points being</div><div>taught within school.</div><div>[6] The Board cited its policies on the teaching of</div><div>controversial issues, neither of which provide for a moratorium.[7][8] On January</div><div>23, after two weeks of criticism in the local and national scene, the Board</div><div>backtracked and repealed the moratorium, but still insisted that opposing views</div><div>need to be considered.”</div><div>Hardison was quoted in an article 01/10/07: 778</div><div>"Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a</div><div>schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven who also said that he</div><div>believes the Earth is 14,000 years old. "The information that's being presented is</div><div>a very cockeyed view of what the truth is. ... The Bible says that in the end times</div><div>everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD."</div><div>The reader might consult the articles above and decide whether Taylor’s</div><div>April story was deliberate untruth or merely incompetence. Meme-13</div><div>Z.2007.04-10 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>State Climatologists Attacked for Global Warming Doubts779</div><div>Some “state climatologists” were not very good scientists.</div><div>Z.2007.04-11a H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Congress, Media Distort Censorship Issue780</div><div>
</div><div>777 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Way_Public_Schools 12/14/11.</div><div>778 www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Federal-Way-schools-restrict-Gore-film-</div><div>1224947.php</div><div>779 Some “state climatologists” were good scientists, but some were not and rather</div><div>than publishing peer-reviewed research with evidence against AGW, they tended</div><div>to write OpEds, books, and work for fossil interests and think tanks.</div><div>780 Bush administration did pressure scientists, including famously, James Hansen.</div><div>Z.2007.04 -12a John Dale Dunn</div><div>Weather Channel Host Shows Climate Alarmists’ Ugly Side781</div><div>Dale complains about Heidi Cullen’s wish that meteorologists know</div><div>mainstream science well enough to avoid misrepresentation. Cullen’s PhD</div><div>is in climatology and she has substantive publications in credible peerreviewed</div><div>journals, although the article does not mention those facts.</div><div>Z.2007.04 -14 James Inhofe address, #4 edited by Heartland</div><div>Why Trust the Media to Get the Global Warming Story Right?</div><div>Z.2007.04 -14a GMI quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Is the Pursuit of Energy Independence an Illusion?782</div><div>GMI’s CEO William O’Keefe was with ExxonMobil and API.</div><div>Z.2007.04-15 Michael Coulter</div><div>Pennsylvania Implements Severe New Mercury Regulations</div><div>“Steven Milloy publisher of the environmental science Web site</div><div>junkscience.com, countered, “There is no evidence that the levels of mercury in</div><div>the environment are harmful.”</div><div>Z.2007.04-1, 17 Michael Coulter</div><div>IPCC Reduces Global Warming Projections</div><div>All governments, including Russia, Saudi Arabia, China and the US must</div><div>agree on every word of the SPM, which almost always almost always</div><div>water it down compared to the full report written by scientists.783 Anyone</div><div>involved would laugh, but people unfamiliar with the IPCC easily would be</div><div>misled by this distortion of the truth.</div><div>Z.2007.04-18 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>(for Jay Lehr)</div><div>Looking for Health and Happiness?</div><div>This replaced earlier ads for Lehr as speaker.</div><div>
</div><div>781 www.climatecentral.org/about/people-bio/heidi_cullen</div><div>782 This theme shows up fairly often. I think their concern is that a real effort for</div><div>energy independence would include strong efforts on energy efficiency.</div><div>783 Ask scientists who have been involved with the SPM meetings or read Stephen</div><div>Schneider, Science as a Contact Sport (2010).</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>160</div><div>Z.2007.05</div><div>784</div><div>Z.2007.05-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Climate Realists Beat Alarmists in NY Debate785</div><div>“Realists” were Michael Crichton, Richard Lindzen, Philip</div><div>Stott.</div><div>“Alarmists” were Brenda Ekwurzel (UCS), Gavin Schmidt</div><div>(NASA GISS), Richard Somerville (Scripps).</div><div>Z.2007.05-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Want to reach … elected officials on environment issues?</div><div>Z.2007.05 -3 James Hoare</div><div>Minn. Legislators Hear Latest Global Warming Science</div><div>“[Minnesota] state Sens. Mike Jungbauer and David Haan, along with Reps.</div><div>Tom Emmer and Mike Beard, sponsored a symposium ... on ‘What Scientists</div><div>Are Really Saying about Global Warming.’”</div><div>‘“• the planet’s moderate warming is unremarkable by historic standards</div><div>Future Symposia Expected</div><div>This was a very worthwhile event,” Jungbauer said in an interview for this story.</div><div>“Not only did we present to legislators the latest sound science regarding global</div><div>warming, but we also have generated a good deal of media interest in covering</div><div>all sides of the global warming debate.’</div><div>Four Republican state Senators sponsored talks by Pat Michaels, Dr.</div><div>Calvin Beisner, James M. Taylor (of Heartland). Beisner is a theologian</div><div>with PhD in Scottish History. Taylor has a J.D.</div><div>Michaels has done little real climate science in last few years.</div><div>From the description, this is classic anti-science: bring in fakexperts who</div><div>can speak to an audience unlikely to be able to challenge them.</div><div>Z.2007.05 -10 – Pat Michaels</div><div>Global Warming Outlook Far from Alarming</div><div>
</div><div>784heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20958.pdf</div><div>785 Science is generally not settled by this kind of debate, as it is far easier to</div><div>generate doubt than create clarity. Schmidt wrote about it.</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/adventures-on-the-east-side/</div><div>Z.2007.05 -11 – Dudley J Hughes786</div><div>Carbon Dioxide Levels Are a Blessing, Not a Problem</div><div>Cartoon: IRS-3E</div><div>Left: The ruling powers in the early Aztec empire believed</div><div>they could affect the weather by ripping out a few hearts.</div><div>“We must help the sun grow hotter.”</div><div>Right: In today’s advanced society, we now understand all</div><div>it takes is a lot of billfolds. “We must stop global</div><div>warming.”</div><div>“[T]he claim that increased carbon dioxide ... in the atmosphere is causing</div><div>‘global warming’ ... has no more scientific foundation than the bloodletting of</div><div>past generations.” Meme-31</div><div>Having spent 40 years in oil and gas exploration, Hughes assures readers</div><div>there is no problem. The cartoon speaks for itself.</div><div>Z.2007.05 -12 James Inhofe address, #5 edited by Heartland</div><div>Senator Challenges Media to Report Objectively</div><div>How the Media Spread Gore’s Propaganda</div><div>“Global warming alarmism is unsupported by the weight of scientific evidence,</div><div>and proposals by environmental activists to impose a drastic global warming</div><div>prevention program are unwarranted, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), chairman of</div><div>the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, stated on the Senate</div><div>floor on September 26, 2006.”</div><div>Z.2007.05 -20 Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Hot Talk, Cold Science</div><div>This was odd timing, as this book was already wrong when it first</div><div>appeared, and the Avery/Singer book had already appeared. Wrong ad?</div><div>
</div><div>786 “Dudley J. Hughes is a retired geologist and author of A Geologic</div><div>Reinterpretation of the Earth’s Atmospheric History, Inferring a Major Role by</div><div>CO2, published in 1998 by the College of Geosciences at Texas A & M</div><div>University.” His career was focused on petroleum exploration, not mentioned, but</div><div>possibly relevant. “he established a highly successful career in exploration</div><div>geology, operating more than 10 different oil and gas exploration companies</div><div>during his 40-plus year career. He is currently the president of Hughes Oil Inc. and</div><div>Hughes South Corp”. tamunews.tamu.edu/tag/dudley-j-hughes</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>161</div><div>Z.2007.05 -20 Heartland half-page ad</div><div>Challenge Debate</div><div>Heartland and Monckton always wanted to</div><div>challenge Gore to debates, formats</div><div>guaranteed to favor those who create</div><div>doubts and confusion via “Gish gallops.”</div><div>Z.2007.06787</div><div>Z.2007.06 -1 Banner</div><div>IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.06 -1aJames M. Taylor</div><div>Supreme Court: EPA Must Explain Why Carbon Dioxide Is Not a</div><div>Pollutant</div><div>Z.2007.06 -1bJames M. Taylor</div><div>Fears of Melting Polar Ice Sheets Are Discredited</div><div>Z.2007.06 -2 Heartland quarter page advertisement</div><div>Energy Policy FOR America A Guidebook for State Legislators</div><div>Z.2007.06 -1 John Dale Dunn</div><div>Record April Freeze Hits U.S.</div><div>Z.2007.06-4 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Scientists Urge Gore to Cool His Global Warming Rhetoric</div><div>The scientists quoted were Don J. Easterbrook, Kevin Vranes, William</div><div>Gray, Patrick Michaels, most of whom are familiar names here.</div><div>Z.2007.06 -5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Associate State Climatologist Fired for Exposing Warming Myths788</div><div>
</div><div>787heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/21222pdf</div><div>788 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/pnw-snowpack offers a</div><div>rather more informed version of the story.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>162</div><div>Z.2007.06-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Oregon Considers Adopting Costly Renewable Power Mandate</div><div>Z.2007.06-6a Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>When Will We Tire of the Fear Mongers? IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.06-8 S. Fred Singer</div><div>British Documentary Counters Gore Movie on British television.</div><div>“In spite of its flamboyant title, The Great Global Warming Swindle (TGGWS)</div><div>is based on sound science, presenting the statements of real climate scientists,</div><div>including myself. AIT, by contrast, consists mainly of the personal beliefs of Al</div><div>Gore.”</div><div>Nobel Physicist Burton Richter789 gave a talk in our town years before</div><div>AIT, but the climate slides could easily have been used by Gore,</div><div>unsurprisingly as both used data from real climate scientists.</div><div>TGGWS did not fare very well.790</div><div> Many serious complaints were upheld,</div><div>dwarfing the minor issues with Gore’s AIT.</div><div>Z.2007.06 -10 Pat Michaels</div><div>IPCC Fourth Assessment Dampens Global Warming Alarmism</div><div>
</div><div>789 www-group.slac.stanford.edu/do/brichter/presentations/2004_10_05.htm</div><div>790 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle</div><div>www.ofcomswindlecomplaint.net</div><div>www.ofcomswindlecomplaint.net/Misreprestn_Views/FundingBodies.htm</div><div>Z.2007.07791</div><div>Z.2007.07-7 DDP full-page advertisement</div><div>Doctors for Disaster Preparedness792</div><div>It is instructive to examine the 2011 meeting, as DDP cooperates closely</div><div>with Heartland and many familiar people appeared as “faculty.”</div><div>Singer, Soon, Robinson and Lehr spoke in both in 2007 and 2011.</div><div>
</div><div>791heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/20958.pdf</div><div>792 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Doctors_for_Disaster_Preparedness</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctors_for_Disaster_Preparedness</div><div>www.ddponline.org Read especially the July 2011 meeting:</div><div>www.ddponline.org/home/2011/1/4/ddp-2011-meeting-july-15-17-albuquerquenm.html</div><div>
</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>163</div><div>“Saturday, July 16, 2011 Welcome Jane Orient, M.D., DDP President793</div><div>8:00 AM</div><div>No Evidence for Anthropogenic Global Warming;CO2 Declared Public Enemy</div><div>#1. S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. Internationally known for his work on environmental</div><div>issues, Dr. Singer pioneered rocket and satellite technology.</div><div>9:00 AM</div><div>Solar Radiation, Indian Summer Monsoon, and Dragonfly Migration.</div><div>Willie Soon, Ph.D. Dr. Soon, an astrophysicist and geoscientist, authored The</div><div>Maunder Minimum and the Variable Sun-Earth Connection.</div><div>10:15 AM</div><div>The Benefits of Carbon Dioxide Enrichment. Craig Idso Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Idso is the founder and current chairman of the Center for the Study of</div><div>Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.</div><div>11:15 AM</div><div>Believing Six Impossible Things before Breakfast, and Climate Models.</div><div>Christopher Essex794, Ph.D. Dr. Essex is Prof. of Applied Mathematics at Univ.</div><div>Western Ontario, and former director of its theoretical physics program.</div><div>12:15 PM</div><div>Lunch: Corruption in the American Political Process. Arthur Robinson, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Robinson, editor of Access to Energy, is a congressional candidate in</div><div>Oregon's District He lost; most of his funds came from source he did not know.</div><div>2:00 PM</div><div>The Gross Scientific Faults in the Anthropogenic Global Warming Hypothesis.</div><div>William Gray, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Gray, prof. emeritus of atmospheric science, Colorado State University, has</div><div>studied tropical cyclones for 40 years.</div><div>3:00 PM</div><div>Baked Alaska: The Real Story of Glaciers, Polar Bears, and Climate Change.</div><div>Richard Alan Keen, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Keen has written 8 books about weather and climate, and formerly taught at</div><div>the University of Colorado in Boulder.</div><div>4:00 PM</div><div>"Sustainable Development": a Wrenching Transformation for America.</div><div>Tom DeWeese Mr. DeWeese, President of the American Policy Center, has</div><div>warned about Agenda 21 for more than 18 years.</div><div>6:30 PM Reception & Banquet. A Trip to the Moon. Hon. Harrison Schmitt</div><div>Astronaut and former U.S. Senator Schmitt was the last man to set foot on the</div><div>moon.</div><div>
</div><div>793 www.ddponline.org/home/2011/1/4/ddp-2011-meeting-july-15-17-</div><div>albuquerque-nm.html</div><div>794 Christopher Essex, Ross McKitrick, Taken by Storm (2003).</div><div>Sunday, July 17, 2011</div><div>8:00 AM</div><div>The Use of Psychology to control Unwitting Minds Through Fear. Jay Lehr,</div><div>Ph.D. Dr. Lehr is Heartland Institute Senior Fellow and Science Director. He has</div><div>authored more than 400 articles and 12 books.</div><div>9:00 AM</div><div>The Strategic Defense of the United States. Gregory Canavan795, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Canavan, an expert in remote sensing and communication works in the</div><div>Physics Div. at Los Alamos National Laboratory.</div><div>10:15 AM</div><div>Low-Dose Radiation Benefits: a Cure for Radiation Phobia. Bobby Scott, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Scott, senior scientist, Loveland Respiratory Research Institute, studies</div><div>mechanism-based modeling of radiation effects.</div><div>11:15 AM</div><div>Fukushima and the Future of Nuclear Energy. Howard Hayden796, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Hayden is professor emeritus of physics, University of Connecticut, and</div><div>publishes The Energy Advocate.</div><div>12:15 PM</div><div>Lunch: Documentary Screening - 3 Billion & Counting, Rutledge Taylor, M.D.</div><div>Dr. Rutledge takes an in depth look into the deadly consequences of the 1972</div><div>ban on DDT.</div><div>2:00 PM</div><div>Enjoy Eating Saturated Fats: They're Good for You. Donald W. Miller, Jr., M.D.</div><div>Dr. Miller is professor of surgery, cardiothoracic division, Univ. Washington,</div><div>and writes frequently for Lewrockwell.com.</div><div>3:00 PM</div><div>Immediate Life-saving Care in a Mass Casualty Event. Steven Hatfill, M.D.</div><div>Dr. Hatfill is an instructor in tactical combat casualty care for specialized units of</div><div>the U.S. armed services.</div><div>4:00 PM</div><div>Radiation Monitoring in Peacetime and War. Allen Brodsky, Ph.D.</div><div>Dr. Brodsky is the author of Actions for Survival: Protections from Nuclear,</div><div>Chemical, and Biological Terrorism.”</div><div>It might not be obvious that a group of doctors would want to spend a</div><div>whole day hearing why global climate change is not happening, but here it</div><div>is. The emboldened names are quite familiar to those who study climate</div><div>anti-science. Sadly, Galileos do not speak here.</div><div>
</div><div>795 Canavan has long been associated with GMI. MAS2010 p.113</div><div>796 MAS2010 p.127</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>164</div><div>Z.2007.07-10 Robert l. Bradley, Jr</div><div>Rush to Fight Global Warming Misses Adaptation Opportunities</div><div>Z.2007.07-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>NASA Chief Downplays Global Warming</div><div>“But perennial alarmist Hansen publicly berates his boss.”</div><div>797 IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.07-12 Heartland ad, full-page</div><div>A Penny for Your Thoughts on CO2</div><div>This is irrelevant and misleading. The Greenhouse Effect is real.</div><div>
</div><div>797 Nontechnical lawyer Taylor berates a top American scientist.</div><div>Z.2007.06-18 Tom DeWeese</div><div>Skeptics Are Scoring Points, Changing Global Warming Debate</div><div>“Gore was determined to turn his personal conquest into draconian federal law</div><div>and human misery…. The mantra of the religion of global warming is getting a</div><div>little boring. … Why? Because even after the global warming storm troopers—</div><div>armed with billions of dollars, the backing of the Hollywood elite, the news</div><div>media, and most of academia—have done everything possible to threaten, bully,</div><div>and force their one-sided propaganda on us, the so called global warming</div><div>skeptics seem to be coming out of their hiding places in ever greater numbers …</div><div>the truth will become ever more inconvenient for Al Gore and his global</div><div>warming zealots.” IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.07-19 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Energy summit for legislators and Heartland “experts”</div><div>“The Heartland Institute’s Eastern Regional Energy Summit will bring state</div><div>legislators together with the nation’s leading experts on key energy-related</div><div>issues facing our country, including air quality, biofuels, energy independence,</div><div>and global warming. We invite you to learn how to fight back against those who</div><div>seem determined to shut down the nation’s manufacturing sector, strangle</div><div>market forces influencing energy production, and saddle American</div><div>environmental innovation with command-and-control regulation.” Nation’s</div><div>leading experts? or fakexperts?</div><div>Z.2007.07-20 GLOBAL SATELLITE TEMPERATURES ~ 2005.01-6</div><div>HOW MUCH GLOBAL WARMING? MAY 2007 Title has evolved:</div><div>IS THIS GW? ?</div><div>EarthTrack ?</div><div>STILL NO SIGN(S) OF GW ?</div><div>IS THIS GW ?</div><div>HOW MUCH GW?</div><div>Why is Heartland asking readers? Heartland uses the UAH files See §Y.1.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>165</div><div>Z.2007.09798</div><div>Z.2007.09-1 Banner</div><div>Z.2007.09 -2 Vaclav Klaus</div><div>Human Freedom, Not Climate, Is at Risk</div><div>Z.2007.09 -4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Greenland Was Much Warmer in Recent Past</div><div>““A new study of Greenland’s ice sheet shows the Earth’s temperature a few</div><div>hundred thousand years ago was approximately 15° Celsius</div><div>warmer than it is today ...</div><div>The particular plant and animal species that thrived in this boreal forest required</div><div>temperatures ranging from approximately 10º Celsius in the summer to</div><div>approximately -17º Celsius in the winter. Temperatures currently range from -8</div><div>degrees Celsius in the summer to -30º Celsius in the winter in the same regions</div><div>of Greenland.</div><div>The analysis showed the forest thrived roughly 500,000 years ago. A mere blink</div><div>of an eye in geologic time, this relatively recent balmy warmth contradicts</div><div>alarmist assertions that the Earth is experiencing unprecedented warming.”</div><div>This is a good example of a common tactic. The original paper799 is</div><div>credible research. Taylor extracted a few bits. then added elements not in</div><div>the original paper, such as the current temperature claims, which are</div><div>certainly incommensurate800 and misleading. Then the whole story was</div><div>spun to conclusions not in the paper, amplified with comments from</div><div>Myron Ebell of CEI, hardly a paleoclimate expert. If enough ice melted to</div><div>match, quite a few important US coastal cities would be under water.</div><div>
</div><div>798heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/21828.pdf</div><div>799 www.sciencemag.org/content/317/5834/111.full</div><div>800 data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data</div><div>data.giss.nasa.gov/cgibin/gistemp/findstation.py?datatype=gistemp&data_set=13&name=&world_map.</div><div>x=273&world_map.y=61 Southern Greenland</div><div>data.giss.nasa.gov/work/gistemp/STATIONS//tmp.431042500000.13.1/station.txt</div><div>June-July-August average has been 6.2C to 8C since 2000. Put another way,</div><div>perhaps a few more degrees is enough to melt that. Taylor did not say that.</div><div>Z.2007.09 5 James Hoare</div><div>IPCC Records Show Thousands of Review Comments Ignored</div><div>“In a historic move, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has</div><div>released the expert review comments and responses to its latest assessment of the</div><div>science of climate change. That release makes clear literally thousands of</div><div>comments critical of the report were ignored or rejected by the IPCC lead</div><div>authors. … For example, the following comment by Eric Steig appears …</div><div>“A good example of this is Mike Mann’s hockey stick in the IPCC Third</div><div>Assessment,” Michaels said.”</div><div>IPCC runs an open process and has generally made the review comments</div><div>available. 801</div><div> Anyone can call themselves an “expert reviewer” simply by</div><div>asking for a copy. Does (lawyer) Hoare have any expertise in all this?</div><div>Z.2007.09 -4 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Concerned about Climate Change?</div><div>James Taylor says there’s no cause for alarm (appears often)</div><div>
</div><div>801 hcl.harvard.edu/collections/ipcc/ Search for Eric Steig. Unlike Pat Michaels,</div><div>Eric is a credible, current, well-published (Science, Nature, etc) climate scientist,</div><div>whose constructive comments on early drafts were often accepted, as in this exact</div><div>case. pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/7786989?n=11</div><div>In the same comment, Steig approved of the handling of the hockey-stick, which</div><div>Hoare did not quote. On the other hand, search for Vincent Gray, a retired New</div><div>Zealand coal researcher, who submitted 1000+ comments, mostly time-wasting</div><div>attempts to change wording with zero evidence or reasoning and thus rejected.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>166</div><div>Z.2007.09-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>CAFE Battle Rages on Capitol Hill</div><div>Law could result in thousands of unnecessary collision deaths</div><div>Z.2007.09-8 Robert L. Bradley, Jr</div><div>History Shows Carbon Caps a Failed Policy</div><div>Z.2007.09-13 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Environmental Activist Funding, Agendas Exposed</div><div>The Green Wave: Environmentalism and Its Consequences</div><div>Bonner Cohen, Capital Research Center, 2006</div><div>“Bonner Cohen has made a fine contribution to honest environmental issue</div><div>literature. I recommend The Green Wave highly.”802</div><div>Z.2007.09-14 James M. Taylor</div><div>How Green Activists Hurt the World’s Poor Meme-175</div><div>“Paul Driessen is a warrior on the front lines of the battle against Third World</div><div>poverty and disease. As a senior policy advisor for the Congress of Racial</div><div>Equality and a senior fellow with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow,</div><div>Driessen dedicates himself to identifying and eliminating the obstacles that keep</div><div>people in underdeveloped countries from breaking through the abject poverty</div><div>barrier.”</div><div>Z.2007.09-17 Howard C. Hayden</div><div>Solar Power Presents Many Hurdles to Consumers</div><div>
</div><div>802 Bonner Cohen worked with the tobacco companies, also.</div><div>Z.2007.10803</div><div>Z.2007.10-1 Banner</div><div>Z.2007.10-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Floridians Rebel Against Governor’s Plans to Fight Global Warming</div><div>Z.2007.10-1b James M. Taylor</div><div>NASA Data Exaggerated U.S. Warming</div><div>Z.2007.10-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Alaska Teachers Indoctrinated with Misleading Global Warming</div><div>Materials</div><div>“Schoolteachers across Alaska are being fed exaggerated</div><div>and false global warming alarmist materials to distribute</div><div>to their students, thanks to the taxpayer-funded University</div><div>of Alaska- Fairbanks. This summer, approximately 60</div><div>teachers attended the university’s Science Teacher Education Program, during</div><div>which they were given global warming propaganda that has been thoroughly</div><div>rejected by sound science.” IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2007.10 -4 Joel Schwartz</div><div>The American Lung Association’s Fear Campaign</div><div>“In a slew of reports with scary titles like Death, Disease, and Dirty Power and</div><div>Power to Kill, environmentalists have been running a vicious multi-year</div><div>campaign against inexpensive coal-fi red electricity, based on the false claim that</div><div>power plant pollution is deadly.” IRS-3E</div><div>
</div><div>803heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/21997.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>167</div><div>Z.2007.10-5 Sovereignty International quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Global Warming or Global Governance</div><div>“The most powerful DVD available today that</div><div>explains the science of global warming and the</div><div>political agenda driving the man-caused hysteria.</div><div>Using stunning graphics and animations, leading</div><div>climate and biological scientists explain why the</div><div>man-caused global warming alarmists are wrong,</div><div>and that carbon dioxide could be considered a</div><div>miracle gas, not a pollutant. IRS-3E Leading</div><div>politicians and experts explain why this agenda is</div><div>being promoted to the tune of tens of billions of</div><div>dollars when the science is so thin. This video is</div><div>converting former man-caused believers into</div><div>skeptics.”</div><div>This804 is produced by Sovereignty International,805 run by Michael</div><div>Coffman, who recommended NIPCC report, see §G.4 for his interesting</div><div>background.</div><div>Z.2007.10 -6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Science Refutes Fla. Governor’s Climate Alarmism</div><div>Z.2007.10 -9 James M. Taylor</div><div>New Aerosol Study Refutes Global Warming Theory806</div><div>‘“The new aerosol study doesn’t show that climate alarmists may be just a little</div><div>off course—it shows that they may be 180 degrees off,” Milloy added. “The</div><div>aerosol study opens up the possibility for an entirely new hypothesis for global</div><div>warming, with aerosols as the culprit. Yet up to now, the ‘consensus’ crowd has</div><div>portrayed aerosols in the opposite light, as cooling agents.”’</div><div>Some aerosols (such as black carbon/brown cloud) cool the planet and</div><div>some (like sulfates) warm it. That is hardly new news.807</div><div>
</div><div>804 www.globalwarmingglobalgovernance.com/</div><div>805 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sovereignty_International</div><div>806 NO IT DOES NOT. Taylor seems to lack basic reading comprehension.</div><div>www.nature.com/nature/journal/v448/n7153/full/nature06019.html</div><div>See Ramanathan’s later testimony:</div><div>oversight-archive.waxman.house.gov/documents/20071018110734.pdf</div><div>807 For instance, the IPCC TAR (2001) dedicates 60-page Chapter 5 to aerosols.</div><div>Z.2007.10-10 S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery</div><div>Health Fears About Global Warming Are Unfounded</div><div>Z.2007-10-10 Quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years Meme-21</div><div>Z.2007.10-11 Robert L. Bradley, Jr</div><div>Climate Science Supports Realism, Not Alarmism</div><div>“Just because many think the planet is in trouble does not mean the planet is in</div><div>trouble, just like the fact that many people thought the world was flat did not</div><div>make it flat.”</div><div>Z.2007.10-12 Quarter-page advertisement808</div><div>REAL Diseases Need REAL Solutions</div><div>“While elites in the U.S. and Europe consider spending billions of dollars in an</div><div>impossible battle to “stop global warming,” millions die from diseases of</div><div>poverty that could be effectively controlled.” Meme-175</div><div>Z.2007.10-18 Thomas Tanton</div><div>Expensive New Solar Project Announced in California</div><div>Z.2007.10-19 Howard C. Hayden</div><div>Home Solar Power Fails Due to Practical Difficulties</div><div>
</div><div>808 The key funders of Heartland are white elite, very wealthy and very</div><div>conservative, but suddenly, Bjorn Lomborg and conservative/Libertarian think</div><div>tanks became really concerned with worldwide poverty.</div><div>thingsbreak.wordpress.com/2009/01/08/lomborg-long-game</div><div>www.policynetwork.net</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Policy_Network</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>168</div><div>Z.2007.11809</div><div>Z.2007.11-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Meteorologist Documents Warming Bias in U.S. Temperature Stations</div><div>This was Anthony Watts. He made a lot of noise, and was wrong, as it</div><div>turned out later, when he finally got a paper published.810</div><div> In fact, the</div><div>badly-sited stations were biased, but biased low, not high, just the opposite</div><div>of his years of claims. Meme-06</div><div>Z.2007.11-3 James Hoare</div><div>Montana Task Force Weighs the Evidence For and Against Global</div><div>Warming Theory</div><div>“Taylor said he is more than willing to return to Montana or travel to any other</div><div>state to present the true scientific and economic facts about global warming”</div><div>James Taylor, a lawyer, presented the Heartland view of science to a</div><div>government task force. One might ask why a government body got its</div><div>climate information from a Heartland lawyer and how that happened.811</div><div>Z.2007.11-4 Sterling Burnett</div><div>Wind Power Costs Continue to Rise</div><div>Z.2007.11-7 James M. Taylor</div><div>Prominent Canadian Economist Proposes a Temperature-Linked</div><div>Carbon Tax Plan</div><div>This was Ross McKitrick. Other than his well-known efforts against</div><div>climate science, it is unclear why he would be called a prominent</div><div>economist. His plan guaranteed nothing useful would happen in a timely</div><div>manner.</div><div>
</div><div>809heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22229.pdf</div><div>810 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts%28blogger%29</div><div>811 leg.mt.gov/content/Publications/Environmental/2008climatechange.pdf</div><div>Z.2007.11-9 Quarter-page advertisement ~ Z.2007.10-12</div><div>REAL Diseases Need REAL Solutions</div><div>Z.2007.11-9a Heartland quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Attention State Legislators</div><div>“The Heartland Institute, under the direction of Science Director</div><div>Jay Lehr, Ph.D., is in the process of compiling an up-to-date</div><div>Encyclopedia of Energy…. We are asking state elected officials to help us</div><div>identify individuals who might be interested in contributing their expertise to this</div><div>project by writing short, narrowly focused articles of between 1,000 and 6,000</div><div>words with no limit on illustrations.”</div><div>This might be a clever way to gather good contacts in state governments.</div><div>IRS-5L</div><div>Z.2007.11 -10 Alan Caruba</div><div>The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died</div><div>Z.2007.11 -11 Dennis T. Avery</div><div>Skeptics Shed Needed Light on Truth</div><div>“1,500-Year Cycles” = statistical illiteracy. Meme-21</div><div>Z.2007.11-13 Tibor R. Machan812</div><div>Global Warming Ad Hominem Attacks Show Alarmist Believers’</div><div>Desperation</div><div>“Someone I know in the community of academic philosophers who works</div><div>mostly in environmental ethics recently labeled me a ‘global warming</div><div>denier’ because I am ... skeptical about the human contribution to global</div><div>warming and related environmentalist contentions.”</div><div>Z.2007.11 -14 Dennis T. Avery</div><div>Our Moderate Climate Crisis</div><div>
</div><div>812 “Tibor R. Machan is a professor of business ethics and a writer on general and</div><div>political philosophy, now teaching at Chapman University in Orange, California.</div><div>Jay Lehr writes in 2004.10-1: “Author Dr. Tibor Machan, who is emeritus</div><div>professor of philosophy at Auburn University, …”</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibor_R.Machan</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>169</div><div>Z.2007.12813</div><div>Z.2007.12-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Gore Film Is Partisan, Riddled with Errors, U.K. Court Rules814</div><div>Meme-13</div><div>Z.2007.12-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Antarctic Sea Ice Sets Records in Oct.</div><div>Z.2007.12-4 Joseph Bast</div><div>Anatomy of a Fake Consensus Meme-03</div><div>Z.2007.12 -11 Steven Milloy</div><div>Two New Children’s Books Take on Global Warming</div><div>Z.2007.12 -12 Steven Milloy</div><div>Film Exposes the ‘Dark Side of Environmentalism’</div><div>“The reality is a far different matter, as the acclaimed documentary</div><div>filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Patricia McElhinney make clear in their</div><div>film Mine Your Own Business, …”815</div><div>Z.2007.12 -14 David Schnare816</div><div>Geo-Engineering Seen as a Practical, Cost-Effective Global Warming</div><div>Strategy</div><div>Z.2007.12-18 Howard C. Hayden</div><div>Inefficiencies Deter Widespread Use of Solar Power</div><div>
</div><div>813heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22229.pdf</div><div>814 No, it did not. See discussion Z.2008.04-9.</div><div>815 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Picture_Institute</div><div>See Figure H.5 Part 1, H50b, Heartland grant.</div><div>816 www.desmogblog.com/david-schnare</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>170</div><div>Z.2008 8 issues</div><div>Z.2008.01817</div><div>Z.2008.01-1a Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Questions Plague Efforts to Grow Wind Power Use</div><div>Z.2008.01-2 Joseph Bast</div><div>Special Issue of Environment & Climate News</div><div>“Three respected818 scientists, Arthur B. Robinson, Noah E. Robinson, and</div><div>Willie Soon, have written a review article on climate change that is generating</div><div>considerable “buzz” in the scientific community. The essay, published originally</div><div>in the peer-reviewed Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, could</div><div>fundamentally change the world-wide debate on global warming.”</div><div>Z.2008.01-2 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>2008 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE CHANGE</div><div>“Hundreds of the world’s leading scientists …819</div><div>Who profits from global warming alarmism?”</div><div>Z.2008.01-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Health Fears Are Unsupported by Science</div><div>Z.2008.01-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Causing Fewer Droughts, Scientists Conclude</div><div>Z.2008.01-6 to 17 Arthur Robinson, Noah Robinson, Willie Soon</div><div>Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide</div><div>This is an infamously-bad820 paper published in the Journal of American</div><div>Physicians and Surgeons, a rather strange choice but one quite friendly to</div><div>the authors. See Z.2007.07-7 on DDP.</div><div>Z.2008.01 -18 Joel Schwartz</div><div>The American Lung Association’s Fear Campaign</div><div>
</div><div>817heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22433.pdf</div><div>818</div><div> www.desmogblog.com/node/1067 Art Robinson</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/willie-soon Willie Soon</div><div>819 People are not “leading scientists” just because Heartland says so. §N.1.</div><div>820 www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=OISM</div><div>Z.2008.02821</div><div>Z.2008.02-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA Denies California’s Attempt to Impose Car Emissions Standard</div><div>“Greenhouse gas emissions from automotive vehicles are best addressed at the</div><div>national level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined.</div><div>Accordingly, EPA has denied California’s request for a waiver of federal</div><div>standards through which the state hoped to impose more draconian restrictions</div><div>on automobile emissions.”</div><div>The Bush Administration denied California’s legal rights822 to create</div><div>tougher emissions standards. E&CN rarely praises the EPA/</div><div>Z.2008.02 -1 Drew Thornley</div><div>Computer Models Fail to Predict Climate Meme-05</div><div>“Computer models that form the basis for future global warming predictions</div><div>have projected significantly more warming in recent years than has actually</div><div>occurred, concludes a comprehensive new scientific study.</div><div>“A Comparison of Tropical Temperature Trends with Model Predictions,”</div><div>published in the December 2007 International Journal of Climatology, is the</div><div>latest study to cast doubt on the efficacy of climate modeling. Climate scientists</div><div>David H. Douglass, John Christy, and S. Fred Singer analyzed 22 climate</div><div>models and found their predictions at odds with actual warming …</div><div>“This new study adds another nail to the coffin of alarmist global warming</div><div>theory,” said Sterling Burnett, senior fellow at the National Center for Policy</div><div>Analysis. “Alarmist global warming theory is totally dependent on computer</div><div>models predicting accelerating warming in the future,” Burnett noted, “yet the</div><div>models have predicted such warming in the past, and the predicted warming has</div><div>failed to materialize.”</div><div>This is another infamously-wrong paper filled with egregious errors823</div><div> Do</div><div>Thornley or Burnett have relevant climate modeling expertise?824</div><div>
</div><div>821heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22628.pdf</div><div>822 www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-epa20dec20,0,1603760.story</div><div>articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/26/nation/na-emissions26</div><div>www.legalnewsline.com/news/220461-epa-announcement-sets-stage-forcalifornia-emissions-standards</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_emission_standards</div><div>823www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=David_H.Douglass%2C_John_R.</div><div>Christy%2C_Benjamin_D.Pearson%2C_S.Fred_Singer</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/10/tropical-tropopshere-iii/</div><div>824 Physics, mathematics and supercomputing experience would make a start.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>171</div><div>Z.2008.02-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Arctic Sea Ice Expanding at Record Pace</div><div>Z.2008.02-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Pope Warns Against Environmental Extremism</div><div>Z.2008.02-8 Robert Ferguson</div><div>Rejection of Proposal for Coal-Fired Power Plants Defies Kan.</div><div>Climate Data</div><div>Z.2008.02-9 James M. Taylor</div><div>Global Warming Skeptics Prepare for International Conference in</div><div>New York</div><div>“The Heartland Institute is providing travel scholarships to qualified scientists,</div><div>economists, and policy experts willing to speak at the event.”</div><div>Z.2008.02-10</div><div>Scientists Speak Out Against Alarmist Warming Theory825</div><div>Z.2008.02-13 Vincent Gray826</div><div>Bali Conference Highlights Global Warming Divisions827</div><div>Z.2008.02-18</div><div>Kentucky Legislator Warns Against Rash ‘Solutions’ to Global</div><div>Warming828</div><div>
</div><div>825 MAS2010 p.81 calls this BALI2007, signers shown pp.97-.</div><div>826 Retired New Zealand coal researcher, known for submitting 1000+ comments</div><div>to IPCC, mostly useless and rejected. I’ve looked at some.</div><div>827 MAS2010 calls this BALI2007.</div><div>828 Jim Cooch is a state legislator and of course coal is big in Kentucky.</div><div>Z.2008.03829</div><div>Z.2008.03-1 H. Sterling Burnett, PhD</div><div>Altamont Pass Settlement Fails to Reduce Bird Kills</div><div>Z.2008.03-2 James M. Taylor</div><div>Outrage Greets Plan to Control Thermostats</div><div>Z.2008.03-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Lomborg ‘Could Save the Planet’</div><div>Z.2008.03-7 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Warmth, Hurricanes Are Really Nothing New</div><div>Katrina’s enviro effects are perfectly natural and won’t cause</div><div>additional problems Cartoon: match being interrogated:</div><div>“So pal. What do you know about the wildfires?</div><div>A: Global Warming did it.</div><div>Arson exists and so do poor forestry methods, but wildfires are made</div><div>likelier by higher temperatures or drought.</div><div>Michaels and Heartland are joking about vast property destruction,</div><div>many injuries and some deaths. Is this830 funny?</div><div>Z.2008.03-9 James M. Taylor</div><div>Report: Temperature Changes Precede CO2 Changes Meme-11</div><div>Z.2008.03-12 Syun-Ichi Akasofu</div><div>Arctic Climate Expert Urges More Honest Climate Change Discussion</div><div>Akasofu is a distinguished aurora researcher, not a climate scientist.831</div><div>He retired in 2007 and then began speaking and publishing embarrassingly</div><div>ill-informed material on climate topics.</div><div>832</div><div>
</div><div>829heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22797.pdf</div><div>830 www.usatoday.com/weather/wildfires/story/2011-11-15/texas-wildfireseason/51221842/1</div><div>“In the past year, wildfires statewide have destroyed nearly 4</div><div>million acres and more than 2,900 homes, killing 10 people.”</div><div>831 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syun-Ichi_Akasofu</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/syun-ichi-akasofu</div><div>832 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/09/progress-in-millennialreconstructions/comment-page-1/#comment-97305</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>172</div><div>Z.2008.04</div><div>833</div><div>Z.2008.04-3 Joseph D’Aleo</div><div>Science Organizations’ ‘Consensus’ Statements Do Not Reflect</div><div>Members’ Views</div><div>Z.2008.04-4 Steven Milloy</div><div>Coal Power Opposition Raises Blackout Possibilities</div><div>Z.2008.04-4 Henry I. Miller, M.D.834</div><div>Abuse, Misuse of Peer Review Process Allow Spread of Science</div><div>Misinformation835</div><div>Z.2008.04-10 Anthony Watts</div><div>January Weather Was Exceptionally Cold, Snowy Meme-04, Meme-15</div><div>May be beginning of long-term global cooling shift</div><div>Z.2008.04-11 Patrick J. Michaels</div><div>Antarctic Ice Melt Scare Lacks Scientific Support</div><div>Z.2008.04-12 William O’Keefe and Jeff Kueter</div><div>Cap and Trade Would Stifle Economy, Delay Transition to Cleaner</div><div>Fuels</div><div>Z.2008.04-18 Open Letter</div><div>Public Policy Groups Oppose Congress Pressuring EPA</div><div>CEI, PRI, National Taxpayers Union, Freedom Works, CORE, etc …</div><div>Public Policy Groups: Translation: think tanks funded by Kochs, Scaife,</div><div>etc.</div><div>
</div><div>833heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/22953.pdf</div><div>834 “Dr. Henry I. Miller is a fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He</div><div>has held numerous posts at the National Institutes of Health and the Food and</div><div>Drug Administration.” Unlike some others, Hoover is not PR/lobbying for hire..</div><div>835 www.desmogblog.com/skeptics-prefer-pal-review-over-peer-review-chris-defreitas-pat-michaels-and-their-pals-1997-2003</div><div>Many Heartland favorites here.</div><div>Z.2008.04-19 –Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Is Global Warming really a crisis? Meme-13</div><div>IS YOUR CHILD BEING EDUCATED OR INDOCTRINATED?</div><div>“The British High Court has ruled that Al Gore’s An</div><div>Inconvenient Truth is partisan propaganda and contains at least</div><div>11 scientific errors. It ruled the film should not be shown in</div><div>classrooms unless accompanied by a document pointing out the</div><div>scientific errors. The Court also ruled classroom time should be</div><div>given for presenting an alternative view. Is your child being</div><div>forced to watch Al Gore’s propaganda film? If so, you should:</div><div>Call 312/377-4000 and request a free copy of Education or Indoctrination? Al</div><div>Gore in the Classroom, a collection of background readings produced by The</div><div>Heartland Institute.</div><div>Talk to your child’s teacher, and if necessary the principal, and ask them to</div><div>remove Gore from the classroom or provide her or him an alternative view.836</div><div>If your child’s teacher or principal isn’t responsive, contact Maureen Martin,</div><div>senior fellow for legal affairs for The Heartland Institute, at</div><div>martin@heartland.org, for free legal assistance.</div><div>Because schools are for learning, not politics.”</div><div>The first sentence’s emboldened words are factual untruths. The judge:837</div><div>? Wrote “It is substantially founded upon scientific research and fact,”</div><div>? Listed 9 ‘Errors’ not Errors. 838</div><div>“It was essential to appreciate that the hearing before me did not</div><div>relate to an analysis of the scientific questions, but to an assessment</div><div>of whether the 'errors' in question, set out in the context of a political</div><div>film, informed the argument on ss406 and 407.”</div><div>? Was satisfied with the reworded guidance supplied with AIT, which</div><div>continued to be used in schools. The opposite was true of TGGWS.</div><div>839</div><div>.</div><div>However, Heartland likely increased the number of complaints to schools,</div><div>in strong parallel with people complaining about evolution.840</div><div>See Fig. W.4.1 for chronology, as child-oriented material rose in 2007.</div><div>
</div><div>836 If people think the Moon is made of green cheese, do they deserve equal time?</div><div>837 www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/2288.html</div><div>838 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/10/convenient-untruths</div><div>analyzes the 9 ‘errors,’ not real errors but ambiguities or poor word choices.</div><div>839 The Great Global Warming Swindle caused serious complaints, Z.2007.06-8.</div><div>840</div><div> www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/climate-change-skeptics-scienceteachers_n_1214049.html</div><div>NCSE’s long effort in defending science is helpful.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>173</div><div>Z.2008.05841</div><div>Z.2008.05-1 Harriette Johnson and Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Climate Change Conference Invigorates Global Warming Debate</div><div>Nature claimed that they would be easy to lampoon, §N.1.</div><div>I will try to summarize.</div><div>A group of (mostly) (conservative old men842) with (mostly) minimal-tonegative</div><div>credibility in climate science agreed that global warming:</div><div>? was not happening</div><div>? or if it was happening, was not happening very fast</div><div>? or was part of natural cycle that was due to turn down soon</div><div>? or had no human contribution</div><div>? or would not have serious effect</div><div>? but if humans had anything to do with it, nothing could be done</div><div>? or if something could be done, it would be too expensive to fix</div><div>? or it was too late anyway</div><div>? But under no circumstances should serious CO2 restrictions occur.</div><div>
</div><div>841heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/23086.pdf</div><div>842 MCC2011, “Cool Dudes. MAS2009, pp.12-16 on demographics.</div><div>Z.2008.05-2 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words…</div><div>“This new Heartland Policy Study,</div><div>by law professor Ronald Rychlak,</div><div>explains how advocates of the</div><div>alarmist perspective on global</div><div>warming have manipulated the</div><div>evidence with charts, graphs, and</div><div>other visual exhibits designed to</div><div>“misrepresent data, misleading the</div><div>public and describing a ‘reality’</div><div>unsupported by science.”</div><div>This report is freely available.843</div><div> So, who is Rychlak?</div><div>“Ronald J. Rychlak is an American lawyer, jurist, author and political</div><div>commentator. He is the Associate Dean For Academic Affairs and the</div><div>Mississippi Defense Lawyers Association Professor of Law at the University of</div><div>Mississippi School of Law, and is known for his published works, career as an</div><div>attorney, and writings on the role of Pope Pius XII in World War II. …Rychlak's</div><div>memberships include the Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society, the National Association</div><div>of Scholars…”</div><div>Again, a NAS-affiliated nonscientist attacks climate scientists: 844</div><div>Some comments are reasonable, but the complaints are especially ironic in</div><div>light of the deceptive Global Satellite Temperature graphs throughout</div><div>E&CN, including Z.2008.08-1 and Z.2009.01-5a</div><div>He also repeats misleading statements such as an infamous partial quote of</div><div>Steve Schneider’s845</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>843 heartland.org/policy-documents/no-115-understanding-visual-exhibits-globalwarming-debate</div><div>844</div><div> chronicle.com/blogs/innovations/guest-post-bottling-nonsense-mis-using-acivil-platform</div><div>regarding Peter Woods attack on climate science, and</div><div>www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=2325 Kerry Emmanuel’s reply to Sterling</div><div>Burnett.</div><div>845 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_J.Rychlak</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>174</div><div>Z.2008.05-5 Harriette Johnson</div><div>Momentum to Continue</div><div>Z.2008.05- 5a Harriette Johnson</div><div>New Climate Science Group Formed</div><div>Tom Harris was with APCO.</div><div>846</div><div>ICSC is yet another front group formed by Harris,</div><div>847 and may have been</div><div>used in money transfers from Heartland, as was NRSP, Fig. H.5, Part 2.</div><div>Z.2008.05-8 Vaclav Klaus</div><div>From Climate Alarmism to Climate Realism</div><div>“It is not about climatology. It is about freedom.”</div><div>Z.2008.05-10 Maureen Martin848</div><div>Letters from Sixth Grade Students Reveal Global Warming</div><div>Indoctrination</div><div>“If you doubt teachers across the country are trying to brainwash schoolchildren</div><div>with global warming alarmism, take a look inside the sixth grade classroom of</div><div>teacher Michael Steria at David A. Brown Middle School in Wildomar,</div><div>California.” IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.05-11 Maureen Martin</div><div>Assigned Readings Show Teacher’s Alarmist Prejudice</div><div>Maureen Martin works for a think tank that defended tobacco companies,</div><div>which only survive by addicting children. IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.05- 12 Kenneth P. Green, D.Env</div><div>Climate Policy Analyst Answers a Student’s Global Warming</div><div>Questions</div><div>
</div><div>846 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=APCO_Worldwide</div><div>847 For background on Harris, Canada/NZ connections, see:</div><div>deepclimate.org/2009/12/08/in-the-beginning-the-national-post-terence-corcoranand-tom-harris/</div><div>deepclimate.org/2009/12/02/in-the-beginning-friends-of-science-talisman-energyand-the-de-freitas-brothers/</div><div>848 See Z.2011.03.11, where she lauds Monckton as a science expert.</div><div>Z.2008.05- 13 Heartland quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Is Your Child Being Educated or Indoctrinated?</div><div>Z.2008.04-19 uses the same words, but the young girl was</div><div>replaced by Gore in this and frequent later appearances. Gore</div><div>of course is a polarizing figure to the Heartland</div><div>demographic.</div><div>Z.2008.05- 13a Maureen Martin</div><div>California State Senate Approves New Global Warming Curriculum</div><div>“Competitive Enterprise Institute Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis views the</div><div>California legislation as more than simply manifesting a desire to educate school</div><div>children about a current scientific debate.</div><div>“Global warming activists understand that children’s opinions are easily</div><div>swayed, and that the most effective way to proselytize adults is to indoctrinate</div><div>their kids,” Lewis said.</div><div>“Activists know that when a child comes home and says, ‘Daddy, why are you</div><div>destroying the planet?’ this is the kind of dinner table conversation that will lead</div><div>parents to change their behavior, if for no other reason than to placate their</div><div>children,” Lewis added. “Scientific debate is discarded, and propaganda is being</div><div>sold at the least common denominator.” IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.05-16 E. Calvin Beissner</div><div>Southern Baptists: Our Position on Global Warming Was</div><div>Misrepresented</div><div>Z.2008.05- 17 Harriette Johnson and Dennis Avery</div><div>Hundreds More Scientists Acknowledge Natural 1,500-Year Climate</div><div>Cycle Meme-21</div><div>Z.2008.05- 18 Heartland full-page</div><div>DIRECTORY OF ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING SOUND</div><div>SCIENCE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY (this is a useful list)</div><div>See Z.2011.04.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>175</div><div>Z.2008.07</div><div>849</div><div>Z.2008.07-1 Diane Carol Bast850</div><div>30K Scientists Sign Petition on Global Warming851</div><div>This is the OISM Petition Project.</div><div>.852</div><div> Meme-94</div><div>One can argue about the specifics of Kyoto, but the rest of this is either</div><div>wrong, misleading or meaningless. Does “catastrophe” mean “end of the</div><div>world?” If so, I could agree: global warming will not end the world. How</div><div>about “Lose New Orleans, Tampa, Miami and many billions of dollars</div><div>worth of sea-level infrastructure?” Is that catastrophe or merely</div><div>inconvenience to some future generations?</div><div>CO2 does help plants, especially weeds like poison ivy and kudzu, and</div><div>insects like bark beetles. Unfortunately, heat and water problems likely</div><div>will cause much more damage to crops we care about.</div><div>“20,679 physicians” found Luckies “less irritating to the throat.”853</div><div>
</div><div>849heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/23410.pdf</div><div>850 Like some others, Heartland is a “family business.”</div><div>851 Not really. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition; MAS2010 p.88</div><div>The Robinsons call themselves “Professors of Chemistry,” a title usually reserved</div><div>for someone at an academic institution. They work at a barnlike structure whose</div><div>“faculty” is mostly not there and includes 2 dead men.</div><div>852 www.petitionproject.org/instructions_for_signing_petition.php</div><div>853 PRO2011 p.67. Advertisement for Lucky Strike cigarettes, 1920s.</div><div>Z.2008.07-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Landmark Proceedings from the 2008 ICCC!</div><div>“In March 2008, 500</div><div>hundred scientists,</div><div>engineers, and scholars</div><div>from the U.S. and around</div><div>the world converged on</div><div>New York City to</div><div>discuss the science and</div><div>economics of global</div><div>climate change.</div><div>Presenters at this</div><div>unprecedented</div><div>conference suggest the</div><div>modern warming is</div><div>moderate and partly or</div><div>even mostly a natural recovery from the Little Ice Age; that the consequences of</div><div>moderate warming are positive for humanity and wildlife; that predictions of</div><div>future warming are wildly unreliable; and that the costs of trying to “stop global</div><div>warming” exceed hypothetical benefits by a factor of 10 or more.”</div><div>Nature says (see §N.1 for entire editorial):</div><div>“It would be easy for scientists to ignore the Heartland Institute's climate</div><div>conferences. They are curious affairs designed to gather and share contrarian</div><div>views, in which science is secondary to wild accusations and political</div><div>propaganda. They are easy to lampoon.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>176</div><div>Z.2008.07-8 Jerome Arnett, Jr., M.D.854</div><div>Best Available Scientific Evidence Shows Secondhand Smoke Is No</div><div>Danger855</div><div>Great picture! Smoker looks blissful.</div><div>Young girl looks on.</div><div>According to Z.2007.09-7,</div><div>circulation included</div><div>“900 classroom distribution”</div><div>“In 2003 a definitive paper on SHS</div><div>and lung cancer mortality was</div><div>published in the British Medical</div><div>Journal.”856</div><div>Heartland failed to mention that Arnett is an Adjunct Scholar at CEI857, one</div><div>of the biggest recipients of tobacco money, Fig. F.4.</div><div>“Dr. Arnett is a former Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine at West</div><div>Virginia University School of Medicine. He is currently a scientific adviser to</div><div>the American Council for Science and Health, and serves on the editorial board</div><div>of the medical journal, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons858</div><div>. His</div><div>writings have been published in the medical journals Chest, Annals of Internal</div><div>Medicine, Journal of Trauma, and the West Virginia Medical Journal, as well as</div><div>in the Wall Street Journal, American Spectator,</div><div>859 and the Providence Journal.”</div><div>As context for the picture above, Bob Herbert's interview with David</div><div>Goerlitz, the "Winston Man" includes:860</div><div>'Goerlitz then asked whether any of the company's executives smoke and got this</div><div>answer: “Are you kidding? We reserve that right for the poor, the young, the</div><div>black and the stupid.”’</div><div>
</div><div>854 “Dr Jerome Arnett Jr. is a pulmonologist who lives in Helvetia, West Virginia.”</div><div>855</div><div> PRO2012, check index for secondhand smoke.</div><div>856 This was an infamous tobacco-funded study by Enstrom and Kabat.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking</div><div>PRO2012 pp.431-432 has more background. Enstrom had long ties with tobacco.</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_E.Enstrom</div><div>857 cei.org/adjunct-scholar/jerome-arnett</div><div>858 He spoke at DDP, Z.2007.07-7. Neither ACSH nor JPANDS are very credible.</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons</div><div>859 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_American_Spectator</div><div>860 PRO2012 p.114. See Tobacco Playbook, §0.7.</div><div>Z.2008.07-06 John Dale Dunn M.D., J.D.</div><div>Hybrid Vehicle Owners Report Adverse Health Effects</div><div>Z.2008.07-10 Dan Miller</div><div>Gore Refuses Global Warming Prediction Challenge861</div><div>Z.2008.07-11 Dennis T. Avery</div><div>Alabama Biologist Fails Global Warming Teaching Test</div><div>Z.2008.07-12 Scott Armstrong</div><div>Fears about Polar Bear Populations Are Refuted by Scientific</div><div>Forecasting862</div><div> Meme-37</div><div>“Scientific discussion is necessary to advance knowledge and inform publicpolicy</div><div>decisions. Expressions of ideology masked as scientific discussion,</div><div>however, do neither.”863</div><div>Z.2008.07-14 compiled by Peter Risdon</div><div>Scores of Peer-Reviewed Studies Contradict Global Warming</div><div>Alarmism</div><div>This list includes some of the worst papers ever written on climate. They</div><div>may impress people unfamiliar with the topic, but anyone who positively</div><div>cites Gerlich and Tscheuschner864 has abandoned any claim to credibility.</div><div>Z.2008.07-16 Donn Dears</div><div>Cap-and-Trade Plans Will Require Draconian Lifestyle Restrictions</div><div>Z.2008.07-18 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>A Must-Read Book on Global Warming865</div><div>“The Deniers, a riveting book by Canadian environmental journalist Lawrence</div><div>Solomon, should be read by anyone who wants to understand where and why</div><div>substantive debate remains concerning climate change.”</div><div>
</div><div>861 Debate format enables confusion much more than clarity about science.</div><div>862 www.forecastingprinciples.com/content/view/79/131/</div><div>Market forecasters and astrophysicist write a bad paper.</div><div>863 A scathing rebuttal by serious scientists who know the topic is:</div><div>www.scar.org/news/polar/Polar_bear_decline_paper.pdf</div><div>864www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=G.Gerlich_and_R.D.Tscheuschner</div><div>865www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Lawrence_Solomon</div><div>HOG2009, pp.159-162. Solomon’s book is very misleading.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>177</div><div>Z.2008.08866</div><div>Z.2008.08-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Hansen Says GW Skeptics Should Be Tried</div><div>“NASA astronomer James Hansen, one of the most visible and vocal proponents</div><div>of alarmist global warming theory, has called for criminal trials against</div><div>scientists, corporate executives, and public policy advocates who disagree with</div><div>him.”</div><div>Hansen is not an astronomer, but a world-class climate scientist and Taylor</div><div>distorted his comments. Try The Guardian instead:</div><div>867</div><div>“James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for</div><div>the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high</div><div>crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt</div><div>about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links</div><div>between smoking and cancer.”</div><div>Hansen’s complaint was not that they disagree with him, but that they</div><div>purposefully obscured mainstream climate science and knew they were</div><div>doing that, exactly like the tobacco executives obscured medical science.</div><div>“Where’s the Warming? Hansen’s global warming alarmism has been further</div><div>undermined by real-world temperature data, measured by NASA satellites,</div><div>showing essentially no warming in the 20 years since his initial testimony.</div><div>Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo, executive director of the International Climate and</div><div>Environmental Change Assessment Project (ICECAP)868, published the</div><div>accompanying chart of the Earth’s temperature, measured by NASA.”</div><div>Just as Ronald Rychlak wrote in Z.2008.05-2, graphs can be used to</div><div>mislead the unwary. He just accused the wrong people. The following</div><div>graph, labeled by D’Aleo:</div><div>“Global satellite (microwave sounder unit) temperature data, compiled by the</div><div>University of Alabama at Huntsville, show that 20 years after</div><div>NASA scientist James Hansen’s first testimony about global warming, global</div><div>temperatures are half a degree F cooler.”</div><div>This is yet another variant of §Y.1. D’Aleo uses only the 2 circled points.</div><div>This is incompetence, at best. It takes 15 minutes to download the data</div><div>into Excel and generate the graph with trend line.</div><div>
</div><div>866heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/23566.pdf</div><div>867 www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange</div><div>868 MAS2010 p.70, 98. Yet another front group, with some of the usual people.</div><div>In fact, June 2008 was about half a degree cooler than August 1998,</div><div>unsurprising given natural variation of La Nina and Total Solar Irradiance.</div><div>Especially when analyzing noisy data like this, one must compute a</div><div>“regression trendline”</div><div>869 that includes all the data. A better graph of the</div><div>same GLOBAL data shows the regression line of 0.018C/year, or</div><div>0.18C/decade.870</div><div>
</div><div>Actually, Hansen’s 1988 analysis was pretty good, within the error bars.871</div><div>
</div><div>This whole article is seriously misleading. Meme-89</div><div>
</div><div>869 In Excel, SLOPE gives a linear regression. This took about 15 minutes to do.</div><div>870 Had D’Aleo started with 1979, the trend would have been smaller, 0.13C.</div><div>871 www.skepticalscience.com/Hansen-1988-prediction.htm</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/hansens-1988-projections/</div><div>y = 0.0182x - 36.299</div><div>-0.6</div><div>-0.4</div><div>-0.2</div><div>0.0</div><div>0.2</div><div>0.4</div><div>0.6</div><div>0.8</div><div>1.0</div><div>1988 1993 1998 2003 2008</div><div>UAH Linear (UAH)</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>178</div><div>Z.2008.08-1a Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Poll: Humans Don’t Cause Global Warming</div><div>Z.2008.08-12 Heartland half-page advertisement</div><div>Emerging Issues Forum</div><div>“The EMERGING ISSUES FORUM is a day-long opportunity for elected</div><div>officials, policy analysts, and government affairs professionals to confer and</div><div>strategize about the top public policy issues of the day.</div><div>Afterward, please join us at the Anniversary Benefit Dinner, 5:30 pm – 9:00 pm</div><div>at the beautiful and historic Hilton Chicago Hotel ….Admission to both events is</div><div>free for elected officials and their spouses.</div><div>Members of The Legislative Forum at The Heartland Institute also will receive a</div><div>travel allowance and complimentary accommodation for up to two nights’</div><div>lodging.”</div><div>? Elected officials will spend all day with “policy analysts” and</div><div>“government affairs professionals.” Might any be lobbyists? IRS-5L</div><div>? Elected officials get a nice dinner, where donors normally buy tables.</div><div>Presumably seating arrangements do not isolate the officials together.</div><div>? Legislators who have joined Heartland’s Legislative Forum get money.</div><div>Z.2008.08-4 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Polls: Public Won’t Accept Higher Prices to Fight Warming</div><div>Z.2008.08-10 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>More Global Cooling Ahead, Study Says Meme-04</div><div>Z.2008.08-11 John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D.</div><div>Scientists Predict Fewer Hurricanes as a Result of Global Warmings</div><div>Z.2008.08-14 compiled by Peter Risdon</div><div>More Peer-Reviewed Studies Contradict Global Warming Alarmism</div><div>Z.2008.08-16 Book review by Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Debunking Persistent Global Warming Myths IRS-3E</div><div>The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and</div><div>Environmentalism By Christopher Horner</div><div>Z.2008.08-17 James M. Taylor</div><div>CO2 Science DVD Debunks Global Warming Myths IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.09872</div><div>Z.2008.09-1 Alexandra Liddy Bourne</div><div>EPA Proposes CO2 Regulations, Seeks Comments from Public</div><div>She told people how to provide comments to the EPA.873</div><div>Z.2008.09-2 Heartland full-page advertisement ~ Z.2008.07-2</div><div>Landmark Proceedings from the 2008 ICCC!</div><div>Z.2008.09-5 Heartland advertisement</div><div>Take the Ultimate Global Warming Challenge…</div><div>This874 was run by JunkScience.com, i.e., Steve Milloy, long-time advocate</div><div>of many kinds of anti-science. He was the referee.875</div><div> No one won the</div><div>money, of course, especially since the second question required perfect</div><div>prediction of the next century. This included a cartoon of Al Gore.</div><div>Z.2008.09-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>Florida Electricity Costs Skyrocket as Utility Invests Heavily in Solar</div><div>Z.2008.09-6 Regnery quarter-page advertisement</div><div>Al Gore is bad for the Planet … by Iain Murray IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.09-9 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Wisconsin Agency Proposes Mercury Reduction Rules</div><div>‘Some analysts say tighter mercury controls are unnecessary and not based on</div><div>sound science. Don Leal, director of research at the Property and Environment</div><div>Research Center, said it is possible to achieve emission reductions in mercury</div><div>without strict government controls. Voluntary incentives and research into</div><div>new technologies would be a better and more cost-effective approach, said</div><div>Leal.’</div><div>
</div><div>872heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/23702.pdf</div><div>873 Many did so, albeit often with poor quality. The EPA answered politely.</div><div>epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html</div><div>874 www.ultimateglobalwarmingchallenge.com</div><div>875 rationalwiki.org/wiki/Steve_Milloy</div><div>www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steven_J.Milloy</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/steve-milloy </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>179</div><div>Z.2008.09-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>IPCC Author Selection Process Plagued by Bias, Cronyism: Study</div><div>Taylor cites a study by John McLean that appeared on Robert Ferguson’s</div><div>SPPI website.876</div><div> Meme-146</div><div>Z.2008.09-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>Farmers to Bear Brunt of Global Warming Legislation</div><div>Z.2008.09-11a Joseph D’Aleo</div><div>Alarmists Blame Global Warming for Recent Floods in Midwest</div><div>“The global warming alarmist movement is reeling since the warming</div><div>stopped in 1998 and cooling began in 2002, accelerating in the past year. In an</div><div>effort to keep their hoax alive, …” See Z.2009.01-5a. IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2008.09-12 Compiled by Peter Risdon see Z.2008.07-14</div><div>Still More Peer-Reviewed Studies Contradict Global Warming</div><div>Alarmism</div><div>“Rhodes Fairbridge and the idea that the solar system regulates the</div><div>Earth’s climate (Journal of Coastal Research, SI 50, pp. 955-968, 2007) -</div><div>Richard Mackey”</div><div>The paper is truly silly.“Global warming alarmism” is a vague phrase that</div><div>Heartland essentially applies to all mainstream climate science.</div><div>Risdon includes some serious papers, but just listing papers is useless:</div><div>“Solar Cycle Variability, Ozone, and Climate (Science, vol. 284. no. 5412, pp.</div><div>305 - 308, 9 April 1999) - Drew Shindell, David Rind, Nambeth Balachandran,</div><div>Judith Lean, Patrick Lonergan”</div><div>This well-cited paper by credible researchers877 hardly contradicts the role</div><div>of greenhouse gases in global warming. Did Risdon actually read this?</div><div>
</div><div>876 McLean is no climate scientist. He predicted that 2011 would be the coolest</div><div>year since 1956 or even cooler, repeated by the NZCSC. He also wrote a paper</div><div>which showed there was no long-term warming after using statistical techniques</div><div>that removed that trend.</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/mclean-exaggerating-natural-cycles.html</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/peer-reviewed-response-to-McLean-El-Nino-paper.html</div><div>hot-topic.co.nz/mcleans-folly-and-the-climate-clueless/</div><div>www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=John_McLean</div><div>scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/09/the_australians_war_on_science_20.php</div><div>877 www.sciencemag.org/content/284/5412/305.abstract?sid=d75ed664-795e-</div><div>4cd8-b119-8f50267214e8</div><div>Z.2008.09-12a Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Georgia Judge Blocks Coal Power Plant</div><div>‘“Judge Moore’s ‘zero-tolerance’ approach to CO2 only serves to restrict</div><div>Georgia’s economic growth and can subject the state to California-style energy</div><div>shortages.” JEFF EDGENS, PH.D. PRESIDENT ECO SOLUTIONS’</div><div>Z.2008.09-18 Review by Jay Lehr, PhD, see Z.2008.07-18</div><div>The World’s Leading Climate Scientists, in Their Own Words</div><div>“Editor’s note: The July issue of Environment & Climate News published</div><div>H. Sterling Burnett’s review of the groundbreaking new book The Deniers. The</div><div>book is so important, and so universally acclaimed, that we believe it merits</div><div>additional analysis. The following review, by Heartland Institute Science</div><div>Director Jay Lehr, Ph.D., provides further insights to supplement Dr. Burnett’s</div><div>analysis of the book.”</div><div>The people mentioned are hardly the world’s leading climate scientists. A</div><div>few good ones objected to their inclusion in Solomon’s articles. Solomon</div><div>led off with Edward Wegman, whose report was filled with plagiarism,</div><div>errors and distortions.878</div><div>E&CN liked this so much they had to review it twice..</div><div>
</div><div>878 MAS2010a is a 285-page report with that evidence.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>180</div><div>Z.2009 3 issues</div><div>Z.2009.01879</div><div>Z.2009.01-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>‘Warmest October’ Claim Was Wrong, NASA Admits</div><div>“A growing number of scientists880 believe Jim Hansen (inset) and the GISS are</div><div>deliberately falsifying the global temperature record.”</div><div>“NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies—known as GISS—was forced to</div><div>admit it committed an egregious error when it publicly claimed October 2008</div><div>was the warmest October in history.”</div><div>NASA naturally makes errors, but this was minor, hardly egregious. In</div><div>any case, the error occurred in the collation of raw data before NASA</div><div>GISS got it,881 and it was fixed fairly quickly. The same people who</div><div>complained at NASA for an error that was not even NASA’s remained</div><div>silent across many years of major error corrections in the UAH record,</div><div>§Y.1.</div><div>NAS GISS interpolates numbers for the Arctic, where warming is the</div><div>fastest, so sometimes shows higher warming rates than others that do not.</div><div>Z.2009.01-2 Heartland advertisement (full page) Z.2008.07-2</div><div>Landmark Proceedings from the 2008 ICCC!</div><div>Z.2009.01-3 Dan Gainor882</div><div>Top TV Networks Spread False Arctic Sea Ice Scare</div><div>The media often get things wrong, but the long-term Arctic ice trend</div><div>continues downward. If Gainor understands or cares about trends in noisy</div><div>time series, that expertise is not apparent.</div><div>
</div><div>879heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/24380.pdf</div><div>880 Just who are these “scientists?” Steve McIntyre, Art Horn, Joe D’Aleo.</div><div>881 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/mountains-and-molehills</div><div>882 “Dan Gainor is the Boone Pickens Free Market Fellow at the Business & Media</div><div>Institute.”</div><div>www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/20/dan-gainor-right-wing-med_n_653252.html</div><div>Z.2009.01-4 Aleks Karnick883</div><div>Obama Pledges to ‘Skyrocket’ Electricity Prices</div><div>‘“Global temperatures are no higher today than they were two decades ago, so it</div><div>doesn’t make any sense at all for politicians to destroy tens of thousands of jobs</div><div>and push up energy prices significantly higher by rushing to impose rash, drastic</div><div>laws in response to speculation about an alleged potential problem that has yet to</div><div>show any signs of actually occurring,” Taylor added.’</div><div>E&CN uses UAH satellite data, which shows significant warming, in these</div><div>two decades, about .25C. Others show .30C-.35C.</div><div>Quotes: Chris Horner (CEI), Kenneth Green (AEI), Myron Ebell (CEI),</div><div>James M. Taylor (Heartland).</div><div>Z.2009.01-5 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Melting Permafrost Scare Deflated by New Study</div><div>This is a credible study led by led by Duane Froese, but was a 1-page</div><div>paper884 about a small area in Canada. Under certain conditions, some</div><div>deep permafrost has survived many millennia. Cohen wildly extrapolates</div><div>from this to claim “no problem ” and criticize comments by Chris Field:885</div><div>‘The Nature article prompted Chris Field, director of global ecology at the</div><div>Carnegie Institution in Washington, DC, to tell USA Today at the time, “The</div><div>higher the temperature gets, the more permafrost we melt, the more tendency it</div><div>is to become a more vicious cycle. ….”’</div><div>Later papers agree with Field and quote Froese, who agrees as well:886</div><div>‘Froese says that while their findings suggest deep permafrost is stable, the</div><div>research has no bearing on shallower sites. "There is a real need for concern</div><div>about future warming and shallow permafrost instability," says Froese.’</div><div>Cohen either did not understand the differences between deep permafrost</div><div>and the vast shallow areas of immediate concern or did not care. Given</div><div>his past help for tobacco companies (Z.2007.06-4). either is possible.</div><div>
</div><div>883</div><div>“Aleks Karnick (…) writes from Indianapolis, Indiana.”</div><div>884 www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5896/1648.abstract?sid=05adfd6f-3263-</div><div>4ad7-8551-bf14d819aaba</div><div>885 The Carnegie Department of Global Ecology is located at Stanford, not in</div><div>Washington, DC with Carnegie headquarters. He is a member of the National</div><div>Academy of Sciences, a fine scientist, and actually understands this topic.</div><div>886 www.nature.com/climate/2009/0904/full/climate.2009.24.html</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>181</div><div>Z.2009.01-5a Heartland graph</div><div>A cleverly-misleading graph (warning, somewhat technical)</div><div>Most readers of</div><div>E&CN might be</div><div>forgiven for thinking</div><div>that NASA had</div><div>showed warming had</div><div>stopped. This is</div><div>another example of</div><div>“How to Lie with</div><div>Graphs 101.”</div><div>Z.2008.08-1 showed an earlier</div><div>attempt that ignored the proper trend</div><div>analysis in favor of cherry-picking</div><div>two dates. A proper analysis from</div><div>1998, which matches the linear trend</div><div>computed by UAH, is at left.</div><div>The graph originated with the National Post (Canada) in late October</div><div>2008,</div><div>887 using an absurdly-sensitive method.888 The graph ended in July,</div><div>near the end of cool (major La Nina ) period. By September, the anomaly</div><div>had risen from July’s -0.01C to 0.14C.</div><div>The Australian copied the</div><div>National Post in January,</div><div>here, but deceptively</div><div>removing a key caveat</div><div>found in NP:</div><div>“Moreover, while the chart</div><div>below was not produced by</div><div>Douglass and Christy, it was</div><div>produced using their data.”</div><div>
</div><div>887 scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/01/the_australians_war_on_science_32.php</div><div>888 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting A 6-degree polynomial overfits such noisy</div><div>data. It is easy in Excel to select polynomials up to degree and find the most</div><div>misleading (degree-6). It takes about 15 minutes to get the data and plot it.</div><div>Heartland recreated the NP graph, with interesting changes, top to bottom:</div><div>? “Since 2005, global temperatures have given back most of the</div><div>warming that had occurred since 1980.” Misleading, Z.2008-08-1.</div><div>? The real data is shown gray, the trendline is black and dominates.</div><div>? “SOURCE: THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT HUNTSVILLE”</div><div>? “ANDREW BARR / NATIONAL POST” (Lower Right)</div><div>This confirms where they got the idea and like The Australian, there is</div><div>no caveat: The data is from UAH, the analysis is not.</div><div>? “According to NASA satellite data—the only timely global</div><div>temperature record—the global temperature in 2008 is no higher than it</div><div>was in 1979.”</div><div>The last and most readable part of the graph is totally misleading, §Y.1.</div><div>This is not a graph of NASA satellite data, but a graph of the UAH analysis</div><div>of the data, often wrong. The claim “only timely global temperature</div><div>record” is simply false. RSS had produced better analyses than UAH from</div><div>the same NASA data. Finally, it is meaningless to cherry-pick a short</div><div>period, compared to analyzing a 20-30 year series.</div><div>The graph sends a clear message to an unwary reader, that if there had</div><div>been any warming it had ended/</div><div>That message appears elsewhere, such as Z.2007.02-11, Z.2009.01-5a,</div><div>Z.2008-08-1. Who created this graph? Taylor? Joe D’Aleo?</div><div>It misleads the reader about the sources, misuses statistical analysis and</div><div>misuses graphical presentation. It cherry-picks dates to avoid alreadyknown</div><div>data that would have contradicted the message. It is a fine example</div><div>of the sort of graphical gimmickry derided in Z.2008.05-2.</div><div>Taylor had to know that graph was bogus.</div><div>In this same issue (2009.01-9) Heartland’s</div><div>usual satellite feature shows October</div><div>anomaly at 0.17C above long-term base,</div><div>attached to this graph.</div><div>Compare Z.2009.01-5a curve with the</div><div>October 2011 UAH results, 2012.01-20</div><div>The former was a graphical lie, created</div><div>only by using bad mathematics on</div><div>cherry-picked data. IRS-0E</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>182</div><div>Z.2009.01-7 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Wind Farms Threaten Endangered Whooping Cranes</div><div>Z.2009.01-7a Advertisement – Donn Dears</div><div>Is it is possible to reduce CO2 emission by 60% or 80%? Carbon Folly</div><div>‘This important new book says “no” and documents how reducing emissions</div><div>would require bans on travel, rolling black-outs, rationing of electricity and the</div><div>total elimination of manufacturing in the U.S.’</div><div>Z.2009.01-8 Krstle Russin889</div><div>New Utah Power Plants Restricted by Referendum</div><div>‘“It is far better for such questions to be decided by states and localities—the</div><div>‘workshop of liberty’ in James Madison’s words—rather than being dictated by</div><div>Washington pseudo-scientific technocrats who don’t know the answers better</div><div>than anyone else,” Harrison said.’</div><div>This is curiously inconsistent. Heartland castigated California for wanting</div><div>to reduce emissions and thought it fine that Bush EPA denied California’s</div><div>legal rights. Heartland frequently criticized any local group wishing to use</div><div>more renewables.</div><div>‘“One of the main concerns that environmental groups try to use to shut down</div><div>this technology is still focused on the perception of carbon dioxide causing</div><div>global warming, and all the scare tactics associated with it,” said Matt</div><div>Schumsky, an environmental legislation policy analyst at FreedomWorks.’890</div><div>This is not perception, just mainstream science and basic physics.</div><div>Quotes: Matt Harrison (Prometheus Institute), Steve Holton (Heritage</div><div>Foundation), Matt Schumsky (Freedom Works).</div><div>Z.2009.01-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>GISS Analyst Pooh-Poohs Colossal Error</div><div>Taylor often denigrates credentials of those with whom he disagrees. So</div><div>many people are labeled “analysts” as to render the term useless. Gavin</div><div>Schmidt is an award-winning scientist with a strong publication record.</div><div>Heartland thought this was colossal, as did Watts, etc. As in Z.2009.01-1,</div><div>Taylor ignored fact that data error was not at NASA, but earlier. 891</div><div>
</div><div>889 The reader might check the unusual bio entry in § X.</div><div>890 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom_Works, MAS2010 p.93.</div><div>891 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/11/mountains-and-molehills</div><div>Z.2009.01-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>U.N. Conference to Be Funded by Carbon Business Interests</div><div>‘The renewable power industry and other corporate entities who stand to profit</div><div>from international carbon dioxide restrictions are funding the United Nations’</div><div>March 2009 International Scientific Conference, casting severe doubt on the</div><div>conference’s objectivity.</div><div>“It is completely unseemly that ‘renewable energy’ profiteers are paying the</div><div>U.N.’s scaremongers to help keep them in the business of insulting true science,”</div><div>said Robert Ferguson, president of the Science and Public Policy Institute. …</div><div>U.N. conference, climate experts from around the world will gather in New York</div><div>City for a more objective discussion of global warming. The 2009 International</div><div>Conference on Climate Change will feature climate scientists from many of the</div><div>world’s most prestigious universities and will have no corporate sponsors.’</div><div>892</div><div>Quotes: Robert Ferguson (SPPI).</div><div>Z.2009.01-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>MICHAEL CRICHTON, 1942-2008 Common-Sense Environmentalist</div><div>‘“Crichton paid a high price in vitriolic professional and personal attacks for</div><div>writing a novel pointing out the flaws in alarmist global warming theory ...”’893</div><div>Z.2009.01-20 Heartland advertisement, full page</div><div>Global Warming Crisis Cancelled (ICCC-2)</div><div>Nature labels these conferences as easy to</div><div>lampoon, §N.1, as this list of featured speakers</div><div>illustrates:</div><div>Arthur Robinson</div><div>Lawrence Solomon</div><div>Richard S. Lindzen</div><div>Christopher Monckton</div><div>Willie Soon</div><div>
</div><div>892 “No corporate sponsors”: this may or may not be true, given the murky money</div><div>mazes involved in sponsoring organizations. They did not need direct corporate</div><div>money for this, given the money sent by DONORS.</div><div>893 He got invited to testify in Congress and probably made a little money from the</div><div>book. Heartland certainly promoted it for him, with 20 half-page ads.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>183</div><div>Z.2009.03894</div><div> (no PDF)</div><div>‘The March 2009 issue of Environment & Climate News opens with news that</div><div>President Barack Obama has selected known environmental alarmist John</div><div>Holdren to direct the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Policy analysts</div><div>say Holdren “represents the worst of what passes for science today.”</div><div>Also in this issue:</div><div> A South Florida government agency has approved a controversial $1.34 billion</div><div>buyout of privately owned lands in the Everglades.</div><div>* Continuing a decade-long trend of declining global temperatures, the year</div><div>2008 measured significantly colder than 2007.895</div><div>* Oregon’s timber industry is being defended by environmental activists.</div><div>* The beleaguered ethanol industry is seeking federal bailout funds from the</div><div>Obama administration.</div><div>* An electric barrier designed to keep invasive Asian carp out of the Great Lakes</div><div>will be turned on at partial strength this summer.</div><div>* Over the past 40 years nuclear power has amassed a safety record unsurpassed</div><div>by any other industrial activity.’</div><div>
</div><div>894heartland.org/newspaper/2009-march-environment-climate-news-john-holdrenobama-science-advisor</div><div>heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/</div><div>pdfs/247979.pdf I/O error/hung download 01/03/11 and other days.</div><div>895 This cherry-picks the 1998 El Nino year as a start and 2008 La Nina as end.</div><div>Z.2009.08</div><div>896</div><div>Z.2009.08-1 Banner</div><div>57% of legislators read Environment & Climate News</div><div>This appears in almost every issue thereafter.</div><div>Z.2009.08-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Nearly 90% of Temperature Stations Show Extreme Heat Bias, …</div><div>This was about Anthony Watts, whose own data later proved</div><div>him wrong. If anything his “poorer” stations were biased</div><div>slightly low, not high.</div><div>897</div><div> Meme-06</div><div>Z.2009.08-1b H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Waxman-Markey Bill Will Raise Electricity Prices $846 Billion</div><div>This had passed House, was sent to Senate, under consideration. IRS-5L</div><div>Z.2009.08-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Tell Your Congressman that GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A CRISIS!</div><div>This was the Oregon Petition fronted by OISM.898</div><div>"Are you interested in providing your legislators with</div><div>proof that more than 30,000 scientists believe global</div><div>warming is not a crisis?</div><div>The Heartland Institute will provide, free of charge to</div><div>anyone willing to hand-deliver copies to U.S. Representatives and Senators, a</div><div>222-page perfect bound directory of the names of all 31,478 signers899 of the</div><div>Petition Project. This hefty 8-1/2 x 11” publication includes a history of the</div><div>project and how the names were authenticated by volunteers for the Project.</div><div>Hand a copy to your legislator today!</div><div>To learn more about how you can distribute this astonishing book directly to</div><div>your representatives, call Zonia Pino at 312-377-4000, or email her at</div><div>zpino@heartland.org today!</div><div>For more information on the Petition Project, visit:</div><div>www.petitionproject.org” Meme-94</div><div>
</div><div>896heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/25679.pdf</div><div>897 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Watts%28blogger%29</div><div>898 www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=OISM</div><div>899 “20,679 physicians” found Luckies “less irritating to the throat.”</div><div>PRO2011 p.67. Advertisement for Lucky Strike cigarettes, 1920s. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>184</div><div>Z.2009.08-3a Heartland masthead</div><div>“Heartland is a nonprofit and nonpartisan900 public policy research organization</div><div>serving the nation’s federal and state elected officials, journalists, Heartland</div><div>members, and other opinion leaders. its activities are tax-exempt under Section</div><div>501(c)(3) of the Internal revenue Code.</div><div>? 2009 the Heartland institute. 901</div><div> Nothing in this issue of Environment &</div><div>Climate News should be construed as reflecting the views of The Heartland</div><div>Institute, nor as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any legislation.”</div><div>How can this not reflect Heartland’s views? Perhaps this means: no matter</div><div>how much Heartland activity might seem to be lobbying, it is really, really</div><div>is not, because Heartland says it is not. This is in same issue as</div><div>Z.2009.08-1b and Z.2009.08-2.</div><div>Z.2009.08-3a James M. Taylor</div><div>Welcome, New Readers!</div><div>“If this is one of your first issues of Environment & Climate News, you are</div><div>probably one of the 31,000 scientists participating in the Petition Project, signing</div><div>a petition that states in part,</div><div> “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon</div><div>dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable</div><div>future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the</div><div>Earth’s climate.”</div><div>902</div><div> We applaud your courage in standing up for sound science in a debate that</div><div>seems far more driven by the convenience of politics ... and we have added your</div><div>names to the complimentary mailing list for Environment & Climate News. Our</div><div>total circulation now stands at approximately 75,000.</div><div> Environment & Climate News is a monthly publication providing the latest</div><div>news on environmental science and public policy issues.</div><div> What makes Environment & Climate News unique is the publication’s focus on</div><div>state and local governments. While delivering the latest news and information on</div><div>a wide range of environmental topics—including climate change, clean air and</div><div>water, land use regulations, species preservation, and technological</div><div>advancements—Environment & Climate News reports how these issues affect, or</div><div>are being addressed by, state and local governments.</div><div>
</div><div>900</div><div> web.archive.org/web/20010917132653/ www.heartland.org/about/legislative.htm</div><div>That lists 100+ legislators. I sampled the first 23, of whom 20 (86%) were Republicans and 3 were</div><div>Democrats, one of whom (John Celona) had some especially interesting history.</div><div>E&CN is filled with articles and advertisements that let the reader assess the nonpartisan claim.</div><div>901 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use</div><div>902 This is meaningless, Z.2008.07-1, given the non-definition of the term</div><div>catastrophic. Even limited-area tornadoes are often called catastrophic.</div><div> Indeed, one of the most significant recent developments in environmental</div><div>science and public policy is the growing importance of state and local</div><div>governments. Wit increasing frequency, pivotal environmental issues are being</div><div>debated and addressed at the state and local level rather than, or in addition to,</div><div>the federal level.</div><div> For example, many states have responded to sensationalist claims about global</div><div>warming by passing laws restricting carbon dioxide emissions or mandating the</div><div>production of wind and solar power. Millions of U.S. citizens are feeling the</div><div>economic pain of unnecessary carbon dioxide restrictions imposed by state and</div><div>local government. ... a pain that will only be made worse by restrictions the</div><div>federal government is considering, as we discuss in this issue’s article addressing</div><div>the Waxman-Markey cap-and-tax bill.</div><div> You are likely to recognize many of the experts who write for Environment &</div><div>Climate News or who provide insight and analysis for our publication. Our</div><div>contributing editors and other experts are nationally recognized for being at the</div><div>very top of their respective fields.903</div><div>As managing editor of Environment & Climate News, I am fully aware that your</div><div>time is valuable and in short supply. Accordingly, we deliver the latest news,</div><div>science, and public policy updates in a format that is concise and to the point.</div><div>We would welcome your participation in Environment & Climate News. If you’d</div><div>like to be quoted by our reporters, for example, please let me know. I’d be happy</div><div>to provide your contact information, and details about your areas of expertise, to</div><div>our writers. And if you have any questions, comments, or suggestions for stories</div><div>you would like to see covered in future issues, please let me know!”</div><div>Contemporaneous with Waxman-Markey, Heartland seems to have</div><div>adopted the Petition Project, doubling its circulation by sending this to an</div><div>audience that had few actual scientists, much less credible climate</div><div>scientists. Obviously, they were working closely with the OISM group to</div><div>get the addresses, since those were not generally public. This effort seems</div><div>aimed to expand the grassroots side of a treetops-grassroots campaign.</div><div>
</div><div>903 E&CN says they are experts at the top of their fields. Are they? There is room</div><div>for doubt. They do share ideology and often association with the same think tanks.</div><div>They quote each other in a newsletter that has often run “Smoker’s Lounger”</div><div>advertisements, in an organization led by a defender of Joe Camel. Do people</div><div>trust their grandchildren to the beliefs of such “experts”?</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>185</div><div>Z.2009.08-4 Dan Miller</div><div>Scientists, Economists Challenge Alarmism at Climate Conference</div><div>“Global warming skeptics, who for a decade have emphasized hard-science</div><div>evidence to refute doomsday predictions from alarmists, added new ammunition</div><div>to their arsenal June 2 at the Third International Conference on Climate Change.</div><div> More than 250 people crowded into Washington Court hotel meeting rooms to</div><div>hear a dozen elite scientists refute media claims that global warming is manmade</div><div>and would have harmful effects on the planet.”</div><div>“At left, Wisconsin Congressman James Sensenbrenner attacks</div><div>the Waxman-Markey bill while Beacon Hill Institute President</div><div>David Tuerck listens.”</div><div>‘”The highly placed conspirators who seek to ride the</div><div>climate scare to world domination have reckoned</div><div>without one thing. You. You are here, and you will not</div><div>let the truth go.” LORD CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON</div><div>FORMER SCIENCE ADVISOR904 BRITISH PRIME</div><div>MINISTER MARGARET THATCHER’ IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2009.08-6 Dan Miller</div><div>New Climate Change Report Applauded</div><div>“ … peer-reviewed by more than 30 scientists, …”</div><div>Heartland attendees applaud, Nature lampoons, §N.1.</div><div>Z.2009.08-6 Thomas Cheplick905</div><div>Higher Carbon Dioxide Levels Benefit Sea Stars</div><div>“I have seen studies that show the CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere in past</div><div>geological ages was much higher than now, to the Earth’s flourishing,” said</div><div>bioethicist Thomas Derr906, a professor at Smith College. “CO2 is the basic</div><div>nutrient in plant growth and is good for the climate, not bad. “Right now we are</div><div>in a historically low point in terms of atmospheric CO2, and it would probably</div><div>be good for us if it were higher—good for plants, good for people who have</div><div>
</div><div>904 Untrue or at best, highly misleading..</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/christopher-moncktons-lies-exposed-again-guardian</div><div>Heartland has bet its credibility on that of Monckton.</div><div>905 The reader should be sure to check his entry in §X.</div><div>906 He is actually a Professor Emeritus of Religion and Biblical Literature, §X.</div><div>Derr’s comments show little knowledge of the science. Do readers consider it</div><div>ethical for him to make these comments? Is it ethical to help an organization that</div><div>has long supported tobacco companies?</div><div>breathing problems, too. In short, CO2 is not the enemy but a good friend to life.</div><div>Considering it a pollutant, subject to regulation, is simply absurd,” Derr added.</div><div>Does Cheplick consider it good that higher CO2 enhances growth of</div><div>poison ivy, kudzu and other weed species? Some varieties of starfish are</div><div>quite destructive and people work hard to keep them from expanding.</div><div>907</div><div>Quotes: Thomas Derr (Smith College), Pat Michaels (CATO)</div><div>Z.2009.08-11 James M. Taylor</div><div>School Board Prez Censors Science</div><div>‘Michael Kundu, a whale photographer and school board president</div><div>in Marysville, California, apparently thinks he knows more about global</div><div>warming than NASA, NOAA, the IPCC, and thousands of scientists. And he’s</div><div>perfectly comfortable banning from “his” classrooms any scientific information</div><div>that contradicts his opinions.</div><div> This surprising state of affairs came to light when Kundu received a copy of</div><div>The Skeptic’s Handbook by Australian science communicator Joanne Nova. The</div><div>16-page booklet challenges conventional wisdom about the causes and extent of</div><div>global warming in an easy-to-read but scientifically rigorous fashion.</div><div> Copies of Nova’s booklet were sent to all 14,000 public school board presidents</div><div>by The Heartland Institute, publisher of Environment & Climate News,</div><div>accompanied by a letter from climate scientist Bob Carter, a professor at James</div><div>Cook University in Queensland, Australia. …</div><div> “The Skeptic’s Handbook is a carefully and accurately written account of</div><div>matters to do with contemporary climate change,” Carter also wrote. “Every</div><div>statement in it is founded in data contained in numerous research papers in</div><div>refereed scientific journals.”</div><div>Jo Nova is no scientist. Her handbook is slick anti-science, strongly</div><div>promoted, §H. It has also been well-debunked.908</div><div>
</div><div>“Donors have paid for over 160,000 copies so far in the US, Australia, New</div><div>Zealand, Sweden and soon in Germany. Over 60,000 copies have been</div><div>downloaded from this site (and countless others from copies on other sites.)”</div><div>
</div><div>907 www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-01/reef-taskforce-urged-to-tackle-starfishdamage/2778936</div><div>908 joannenova.com.au/global-warming</div><div>www.skepticalscience.com/A-Scientific-Guide-to-the-Skeptics-Handbook.html</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>186</div><div>Z.2009.08-12 Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Julian Simon’s Book Masterfully Explains Flaws of Alarmism</div><div>‘“If every misinformed but open-minded person on this planet read Simon’s</div><div>book, the terror wrought by environmental zealots would quickly come to an</div><div>end.”’</div><div>Z.2009.08-12a Heartland quarter-page advertisement see §G.4</div><div>Global warming is not a crisis! Ad for NIPCC</div><div>Z.2009.08-13 advertisement</div><div>Ready for plain talk on global warming?</div><div>This is by Leo F. Johnson, who seems to be primarily a business</div><div>consultant.909</div><div> It is unclear why people should trust strategy advice from</div><div>someone who rejects science.</div><div>Z.2009.08-14 Jay Lehr, PhD.</div><div>A Primer on Global Warming: Dispelling CO2 Myths</div><div>“Temperatures have fluctuated over the past 8,000 years, Meme-02 and current</div><div>temperatures are below the average for the past 8,000 years.910 A modest amount</div><div>of global warming, should it occur, would benefit humans and ecosystems.</div><div>Meme-120 During the Medieval Warm Period, from roughly 800 to 1200 AD,</div><div>temperatures were warmer than today, Meme-56 allowing great prosperity for</div><div>mankind. Greenland was actually green back then. Meme-26 Temperature</div><div>fluctuations during the current 300-year recovery from the Little Ice Age, which</div><div>bottomed out around 1700 AD, correlate almost perfectly911 with fluctuations in</div><div>solar activity. This temperature recovery long predates human use of significant</div><div>amounts of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas.’</div><div>
</div><div>909 www.bigideasforcee.eu/en/key-speakers/leo-johnson</div><div>910 No. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png</div><div>911 No or at least very misleading. Meme-1, Meme-32. Other forcings helped the</div><div>Little Ice Age happen, and the temperature rise of the last 30 years is badly</div><div>uncorrelated with the changes in solar activity. Actually, CO2 started rising in the</div><div>late 1700s as seen in i39.tinypic.com/if0m5g.jpg. Evidence is accumulating that</div><div>most of the dip into 1600AD was caused by post-Columbus die-off in the</div><div>Americas and resulting massive reforestation.</div><div>news.stanford.edu/news/2009/january7/manvleaf-010709.html</div><div>Z.2009.08-17 Krystle Russin</div><div>Global Hurricane Activity Lowest in 30 Years</div><div>Z.2009.08-18 Jay Lehr, PhD.</div><div>Correction</div><div>Some day the world will wake up and laugh when we finally realize that the</div><div>entire pursuit of economic ruin in the name of saving the planet from increasing</div><div>carbon dioxide has in fact been a terrible joke. It is an unarguable fact that the</div><div>portion of the Earth’s greenhouse gas envelope contributed by mankind is</div><div>negligible, Meme-29 barely one-tenth of 1 percent of the total.</div><div>CO2 is no more than 4 percent of the greenhouse gas envelope (water vapor is</div><div>more than 90 percent, followed by methane and nitrous and sulfur oxides). Of</div><div>that 4 percent, mankind contributes a little more than 3 percent, divided among</div><div>transportation, energy production, etc. Three percent of 4 percent is 0.12</div><div>percent.</div><div>And for that we are sentencing the planet to decades of economic devastation.</div><div>Once again, Lehr misleads. In the last few million years, Earth has cycled</div><div>between ~180parts per million and 280ppm, enough to change the average</div><div>temperature by ~7C (_13F). That oscillation is the normal balance without</div><div>humans, and it shows that Earth’s climate is very sensitive to CO2 level.</div><div>Meme-11 Humans have already added another 100ppm, and it seems</div><div>increasingly likely that we will double the 280 to 560, at least.</div><div>Lehr ignores Heartland’s own graph from p.20:</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>187</div><div>Z.2009.10912</div><div>Z.2009.10-2 Heartland ad, full-page ad, ~ Z.2009.08-2</div><div>Tell Your Congressman that GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A CRISIS!</div><div>IRS-5L?</div><div>The US Senate was still considering an equivalent to Waxman-Markey.</div><div>Z.2009.10-5 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>New North Dakota Oil Find Could Be a Gusher</div><div>That might even be true.</div><div>Z.2009.10-7 Penny Rodriguez913</div><div>Austin Consumers Avoid Pricey Renewable Power</div><div>That might be true, but it is curious they could not find someone from</div><div>Texas to write about it.</div><div>Quotes: David Guenther (TPPF), Dan Simmons (Institute for Energy</div><div>Research)</div><div>Z.2009.10-8 Krystle Russin</div><div>Wyoming Protects Sage Grouse from Wind Farms</div><div>Quotes: Charles Ware (Wyoming Liberty Group), Roger Meiners (PERC)</div><div>Z.2009.10-9 Heartland ad, half-page</div><div>The 2010 International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC-4)</div><div>The highlighted speakers are</div><div>Hon. George F. Allen</div><div>Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Patrick Michaels, PhD</div><div>Art Robinson, Ph.D</div><div>James Taylor, J.D.</div><div>
</div><div>912heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/25979.pdf</div><div>913 “Penny Rodriguez writes from Parrish, Florida.”</div><div>Z.2009.10-10 Joseph Bast</div><div>Why Pennsylvania’s Sen. Casey Is Wrong on Cap-and-Trade</div><div>. The “international scientific community” has not concluded human activities</div><div>“are a leading cause of climate warming.” At best, there is agreement that human</div><div>activities have played some role in the warming of the second half of the</div><div>twentieth century, but how large a role, how much warming actually</div><div>occurred, and whether the world will continue to warm are all subject to lively</div><div>debate in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.</div><div>The theory of manmade global warming is contradicted by extensive empirical</div><div>data, including the absence of a global warming trend since 2000 despite rising</div><div>carbon dioxide emissions, variations in global temperatures that occurred long</div><div>before human activity could be a cause, and natural feedback loops that have</div><div>been observed to counteract the warming effects of greenhouse gases.</div><div>The only scientific support for the theory of manmade global warming is</div><div>computer model forecasts, which are not reliable and are not evidence.</div><div>Most of this is wrong or misleading. Joseph Bast misleads, but then, he</div><div>was quite happy to help tobacco companies who hurt children.</div><div>Z.2009.10-13 Krystle Russin</div><div>EPA Scientist Carlin Explains His Dissent on Endangerment Finding</div><div>Carlin is an economist, not a climate scientist. Those are different and in</div><div>this context, calling him a scientist is seriously misleading.914</div><div>His document was junk, more incompetent than most anti-science I have</div><div>seen. He is yet another old man talking about topics he does not know, but</div><div>on which he has firm opinions.915</div><div>Z.2009.10-14 George Allen916</div><div>China Knows That Proposed Climate Deals Are Financially Ruinous</div><div>
</div><div>914 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Carlin A B.S. in physics does not make one a</div><div>scientist, but in fact, it makes his silly report even more embarrassing.</div><div>915 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes</div><div>916 “George Allen is a former senator, congressman, and governor of Virginia.</div><div>He is chairman of the American Energy Freedom Center. This article originally</div><div>appeared in Investor’s Business Daily and is reprinted with permission.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>188</div><div>Z.2009.10-16</div><div>Scientists Urge Congress to Reject Alarmism</div><div>“A group of prominent scientists has sent Congress a letter urging lawmakers to</div><div>reject global warming alarmism and see through the motives of an Open Letter</div><div>from the Woods Hole Research Center exhorting Congress to quickly pass laws</div><div>restricting global warming emissions. The text of the scientists’ letter is</div><div>reproduced below.” IRS-3E , Meme-36</div><div>This added Lindzen to the organizers described in [MAS2009.]</div><div>Z.2009.10-16a Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>A Primer on Global Warming: Dispelling Myths</div><div>“Editor’s note: Each month, Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr, Ph.D.</div><div>presents evidence that mankind has no significant impact on the Earth’s</div><div>climate.”</div><div>“The National Aeronautic and Space Agency (NASA) has determined Mars,</div><div>Pluto, Jupiter, and the largest moon of Neptune warmed at the same time the</div><div>Earth recently warmed.”</div><div>Each month, Lehr presents the same old, long-debunked memes, most</div><div>easily findable at Skeptical Science.</div><div>917</div><div> Detailed debunking is timeconsuming,</div><div>918</div><div> so just one example is shown here. All are intended to</div><div>sound reasonable to anyone unfamiliar with the relevant science or facts.</div><div>At Skeptical Science, those are:</div><div>Meme-19 Mars is warming</div><div>Meme-52 Pluto is warming</div><div>Meme-49 Jupiter is warming</div><div>Meme-48 Neptune is warming</div><div>Among the dozens of planets and moons, some are warming, some are</div><div>cooling, not a surprise, especially as some have extreme elliptical orbits.</div><div>This is typical of an argument that sounds reasonable, but is simply silly.</div><div>Pluto has a 248-year orbit, so we do not even have records of one complete</div><div>Pluto-year. We have far better records of solar irradiance via satellites and</div><div>we know quite well there has been no recent rise in solar radiation.</div><div>
</div><div>917 www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php</div><div>This is a numbered list of links to further explanations, backed by peer-reviewed</div><div>literature in credible publications.</div><div>918 MAS2010a</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>189</div><div>Z.2009.10-17 David Evans919</div><div>Alarmists Abandon Air Temps, But Oceans Also Show Cooling</div><div>Z.2009.10-18 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Sahara Desert Greening, Thanks to Global Warming</div><div>AGW moves rainfall patterns. The Sahara may get more rain, but of</div><div>course the US SouthWest and Northern Mexico will get less.</div><div>Z.2009.10-18a Jay Lehr, PhD</div><div>Climate Alarmism = Economic Devastation</div><div>This repeated Z.2009.08-18, but with more graphic</div><div>emphasis.</div><div>Z.2009.10-19 Heartland full-page ad</div><div>Global warming? Global cooling? Climate change?</div><div>Let Heartland Shine Some Light!</div><div>“These monthly newspapers serve as national outreach tools for the free-market</div><div>movement. Heartland’s government relations department is in constant contact</div><div>with thousands of state and federal elected officials on the top policy issues of</div><div>the day. That is coupled with an active in-house public relations department that</div><div>authors daily articles, press releases, letters to the editor, and op-eds. Finally,</div><div>Heartland is home to PolicyBot, an online database of tens of thousands of freemarket</div><div>articles and research on a wide variety of policy issues.</div><div>Our combined publishing, government relations, and public relations</div><div>efforts make us the premier free-market source for legislators, thought</div><div>and opinion leaders, and concerned citizens.”</div><div>
</div><div>919 “David Evans, Ph.D. is an Australian scientist and head of Science Speak.”</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/david-evans As usual, Heartland inflates.</div><div>He is Jo Nova’s partner/husband, is really an EE by background, has not written</div><div>peer-reviewed research in climate science.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>190</div><div>Z.2010 4 issues</div><div>Z.2010.08920</div><div>Z.2010.08-2 Alyssa Carducci921</div><div>Gulf States Take Lead in Addressing Oil Spill</div><div>“Gulf Coast states are taking the initiative in addressing the BP oil spill, as the</div><div>federal government continues to do little to protect them from advancing oil and</div><div>has been standing in the way of many remedial actions they wish to take.</div><div>State and local officials in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi are</div><div>expressing frustration at the federal government’s ineffectiveness in protecting</div><div>coastlands …”</div><div>Compare this treatment with that of Hurricane Katrina in Z2005.10-1 and</div><div>Z2005.10-2. Those emphasized that hurricanes had no relationship to</div><div>global warming, without ever mentioning the Bush administration’s</div><div>handling of that natural disaster. This one mostly focuses on any</div><div>criticisms of Federal government under Obama, by states who have often</div><div>fought hard to support oil companies, but omits any mention of oil</div><div>companies’ responsibilities. One can argue the details endlessly, but it is</div><div>certain that some measures proposed by states, like Bobby Jindal’s sand</div><div>berms, were total failures that did nothing but waste money.922</div><div>Z.2010.08-3 James M. Taylor</div><div>Cap-and-Trade Is Bait-and-Switch</div><div>‘“All that Harry Reid is missing in his dishonest used car salesman playbook is a</div><div>rolled back odometer and bubble gum holding the car doors in place.”’</div><div>Z.2010.08-4 James M. Taylor, ad for Cap and Trade Handbook</div><div>What’s Wrong with Cap and Trade</div><div>
</div><div>920heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/28128.pdf</div><div>921</div><div>922 topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/bobby_jindal/index.html</div><div>content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/12/oil-spill-panel-callsjindals-sand-berms-a-220m-waste/1</div><div>news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/panel-jindal-sand-berm-project-colossal-wastetime-20101216-143112-004.html</div><div>www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_12/027168.php</div><div>Z.2010.08-8 Cheryl Chumley</div><div>Wind Turbines Killing Thousands of Birds in Northwest, Surveys Find</div><div>Z.2010.08-9 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Alaska Challenges Polar Bear Habitat Designation</div><div>Z.2010.08-9a Advertisement, half-page</div><div>Global Warming Sham Shirts!923</div><div> IRS-3E</div><div>? “BAN CO2!!! Sure, all the plants and trees will die…</div><div>BUT IT’S FOR THE ENVIRONMENT!!!</div><div>? If you drive small cars to fight global warming</div><div>do you drive big cars to fight global cooling?</div><div>? THE CLIMATE CAN CHANGE?!?</div><div>How long has this been going on?!?</div><div>…forever? Really? …huh, who knew…</div><div>? If you honestly believe CO2 is pollution STOP EXHALING!</div><div>YOU’RE PART OF THE PROBLEM!!!</div><div>? HADLEY CLIMATE RESEARCH UNIT UNIVERSITY OF EAST</div><div>ANGLIA</div><div>…massaging data to fit the results since 1972</div><div>? 1° 100 YEARS TIME TO PANIC!!!</div><div>? SAVE THE PLANET!!!</div><div>…from the morons who think they can save the planet.</div><div>? 0.04% Kinda makes you feel warm all over</div><div>That’s how much CO2 is in the atmosphere.”</div><div>
</div><div>923</div><div> The image font is small, so wordings were checked at greenytease.com.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>191</div><div>Z.2010.08-10 James M. Taylor</div><div>IPCC Selects Inflammatory Mote as Lead Author IRS-3E</div><div>“Proponents of greater objectivity, cooperation, and transparency at the United</div><div>Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) received a severe</div><div>body blow when the agency selected the highly controversial Philip Mote as a</div><div>lead author for the Fifth Assessment Report, scheduled for release in 2013.</div><div>Twice in the past three years Mote has put himself in the spotlight by engaging</div><div>in controversial tactics to silence dissent against global warming alarmism.</div><div>…Mote also used the political process to denounce opponents of global warming</div><div>alarmism by using an Oregon State University listserv of professors, students,</div><div>employees, and interested citizens to smear Art Robinson, a climate change</div><div>scientist who had just won the Republican primary for Oregon’s 4th</div><div>Congressional District.</div><div>Now as he moved on to Oregon as state climatologist, he is at it again, spreading</div><div>nonsense about western snowpack and ... attacking Dr. Art Robinson, a real</div><div>scientist and American hero who won the primary to contend for the</div><div>congressional seat in the 4th district,” D’Aleo added.</div><div>Perhaps Mote should not have used that listerv, but it is fakery to call</div><div>Robinson a climate change scientist. He works at a barnlike building in</div><div>the woods, with his sons. His “faculty” still has 2 members dead for</div><div>several years. He has not published a single paper on climate in a credible</div><div>peer-reviewed journal. His TV interview with Rachel Maddow is</div><div>instructive.</div><div>Z.2010.08-11 Roy M. Spencer</div><div>NAS Begins Global Warming Inquisition IRS-3E Meme-146</div><div>“A new “study” has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy</div><div>of Sciences (PNAS) examining the credentials and publication records of climate</div><div>scientists who are global warming skeptics versus those who accept the “tenets</div><div>of anthropogenic climate change.”</div><div>It should be no surprise that the study finds scientists skeptical of the</div><div>anthropogenic global warming (AGW) crisis theory have fewer publications or</div><div>are less credentialed than the marching army of scientists who have been paid</div><div>hundreds of millions of dollars over the past 20 years to find every potential</div><div>connection between fossil fuel use and changes in nature.”</div><div>Roy Spencer’s career has been based on government money, but he has</div><div>been wrong again and again. When scientists complain about exclusion,</div><div>sometimes it is because they are poor scientists, §Y.1.</div><div>Z.2010.08-11a James M. Taylor</div><div>New Mexico Board to Consider CO2 Curbs</div><div>“New Mexico relies heavily on cost-effective coal for our electricity,” said</div><div>Marita Noon, executive director of the Albuquerque-based Citizens Alliance for</div><div>Responsible Energy. “We have no nuclear reactors in the state, which will make</div><div>a forced reduction in carbon dioxide emissions very expensive. A New Mexicoonly</div><div>carbon cap will chase businesses out of the state, taking jobs and economic</div><div>vitality with them.”</div><div>Z.2010.08-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>Study Shows that Wind Power Raises CO2 Emissions</div><div>“In a paper published at the Web site Master Resource, electrical engineer Kent</div><div>Hawkins shows when wind power surpasses 5 percent of power generated, the</div><div>frequent ramping up and ramping down of other power sources to compensate</div><div>for wind’s unpredictable variability causes such inefficiency in power generation</div><div>that overall carbon dioxide emissions rise.”</div><div>Hawkins is a retired Canadian EE.924</div><div>Master Resource calls925 itself “A free-market energy blog,”</div><div>whose Principals include:</div><div>Robert L. Bradley (Oil/gas, Institute for Energy Research, which owns the</div><div>domain),</div><div>Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger (a student/employee of Pat Michaels),</div><div>Marlo Lewis (CEI).</div><div>Contributors include Tom Tanton. Most of these are seen elsewhere in</div><div>Heartland.</div><div>
</div><div>924 alleghenytreasures.com/2010/03/15/kent-hawkins-integrating-renewables-havepolicymakers-faced-the-realities</div><div>
</div><div>925 www.masterresource.org/about</div><div>www.whois.net/whois/masterresource.org.com This is Bradley’s website.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>192</div><div>Z.2010.08-16 James M. Taylor</div><div>Scientist Explains Geologists’ Vote Against Alarmism See §P.</div><div>“Member scientists of the American</div><div>Institute of Professional Geologists’</div><div>Ohio Section (AIPG-OH) approved by</div><div>an overwhelming majority a statement</div><div>saying scientific evidence does not</div><div>support the theory that humans are</div><div>causing a global warming crisis.”</div><div>This is an example of the ways in which an otherwise-credible professional</div><div>society contains a small subgroup that makes noise far out of proportion to</div><div>its expertise. Some geoscientists are both geologists and climate</div><div>researchers, but petroleum/mining geologists usually are not.</div><div>In this case, it is clear that some members of AIPG-OH relied on E&CN</div><div>for their science. They cited it often, along with Roy Spencer’s blog and</div><div>the OISM petition in a position statement that purported to be based purely</div><div>on science. See §P for detailed discussion of the way E&CN successfully</div><div>misinformed them. If people with earth sciences backgrounds can be</div><div>fooled, what chance does the typical E&CN reader have?926</div><div>The 2 men pictured (Matthew Justice and Bill Shafer) were the “Coauthors</div><div>designate” for their position paper. The national AIPG gave</div><div>Justice an award for his efforts.</div><div>Z.2010.08-17 Walter Cunningham927</div><div>Politics Outweigh Science in Global Warming Debate</div><div>Nothing guarantees that former astronaut knows climate science.</div><div>Like Harrison Schmitt, this seems another very sad case.</div><div>Z.2010.08-19 Americans for Prosperity Foundation928 full-page ad</div><div>
</div><div>926 To be fair, AIPG members may be especially susceptible to E&CN’s views.</div><div>927 “Walter Cunningham maintains the waltercunningham.com Web site.”</div><div>Global Warming: Facts versus Faith, by Walter Cunningham, the Heartland</div><div>institute, February 2010: www. heartland.org/books/FactsFaith.html</div><div>928 Koch-funded, Tea Party sparkplug.</div><div>Z.2010.09929</div><div>Z.2010.09-1 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Gulf Ecology Recovering from Oil Spill</div><div>Working in a variety of ways, Mother Nature appears to be taking the lead in</div><div>restoring the ecological health of the Gulf of Mexico in the aftermath of what</div><div>President Barack Obama has called “the worst environmental disaster in</div><div>American history.” The federal government, however, is putting up enormous</div><div>roadblocks to the region’s economic recovery.</div><div>Oil Dissipating The giant oil slicks have all but disappeared, and Louisiana’s</div><div>coast has been largely spared from the massive pollution many observers feared</div><div>would destroy the state’s coastal grasslands and bayous.</div><div>Response teams have collected approximately 3,000 dead birds and nearly 500</div><div>dead sea turtles, some of which can be directly attributed to the BP accident.</div><div>The cost to wildlife, however tragic, has nonetheless been lower than expected.</div><div>Wind turbines in California’s Altamont Pass alone kill approximately 7,000birds</div><div>every year, and the American Bird Conservancy estimates wind turbines kill at</div><div>least 75,000 birds each year throughout the United States. … Far and away the</div><div>biggest blow to the region’s economy has come from the Obama</div><div>administration’s six-month moratorium on deepwater oil and gas drilling. …</div><div>Kish continued, “Tens of thousands of well-paying jobs may leave for good from</div><div>America’s premier oil province after more than 60 years of successful offshore</div><div>operations and 40,000 successful oil and gas wells. A great nation cannot base its</div><div>energy decisions on a freak accident. And if it does, it will not be great for long.”</div><div>Z.2010.09-2 Heartland advertisement, full-page</div><div>Welcome to the pub (picture of beer)</div><div>“The Freedom Pub is a place where freedom-lovers from around the world can</div><div>share ideas and news, watch videos, and learn about</div><div>upcoming events. Create your own page and blog,</div><div>share videos, and a whole lot more. This is where</div><div>freedom is discovered and spreads. Become a</div><div>member now! www.freedompub.org”</div><div>What demographic might be targeted by this?</div><div>
</div><div>929heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/28301.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>193</div><div>Z.2010.09-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Wuebbles Brings More Bias to IPCC Panel IRS-3E, Meme-146</div><div>“…IPCC has been the subject of substantial criticism, from insiders and</div><div>outsiders alike, regarding its lack of scientific objectivity and its record of</div><div>advocacy rather than dispassionate science. The newly announced leaders for its</div><div>2013 report promise more of the same. …</div><div>This month we note how newly appointed Coordinating Lead Author Donald</div><div>Wuebbles uses misleading language and false temperature claims to support his</div><div>ongoing advocacy for carbon dioxide restrictions.</div><div>Wuebbles, a professor at the University of Illinois-Champaign, blames humans</div><div>for recent global warming in an article published by his school’s National Center</div><div>for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA). Wuebbles argues scientists must</div><div>convince the public to take strong, immediate action to restrict carbon dioxide</div><div>emissions. Discussing his view of scientists’ role in the global warming debate,</div><div>Wuebbles argues in the article, “The problem then becomes convincing them</div><div>[the public] to care and to act when the largest effects are likely to occur in their</div><div>children’s and grandchildren’s lifetimes, and perhaps not their own.” When an</div><div>IPCC coordinating lead author says it’s important to induce the public to take</div><div>political action, the prospects are bleak that he will produce an objective,</div><div>dispassionate, scientifically sound report.</div><div>That reality was painfully evident in the NCSA article. Wuebbles—motivated by</div><div>political advocacy or mere ignorance— played fast and loose with the scientific</div><div>facts when he asserted current temperatures are historically warm. “The global</div><div>temperatures of the last decade are larger than they have been</div><div>in over 2,000 years,” claimed Wuebbles. The IPCC itself, however, has</div><div>previously reported global temperatures were warmer 1,000 years ago during the</div><div>Medieval Warm Period Meme-56 and 2,000 years ago during the Roman Warm</div><div>Period. The greater warmth of these time periods has been confirmed by ice core</div><div>reconstructions, sedimentary records, tree ring records, and historical</div><div>observations. Only the most extreme alarmists claim current temperatures are</div><div>warmer than either of those two time periods, and they usually include caveats to</div><div>acknowledge they may be wrong. Not content to misrepresent the Earth’s</div><div>temperature history, Wuebbles in the very same paragraph resorts to the</div><div>language of political propaganda to emphasize his dubious claim. “The Earth</div><div>clearly has a fever,” Wuebbles claims, in language almost identical to that used</div><div>by the widely discredited Al Gore.</div><div>When the U.N. appoints such a partisan and vocal advocate for carbon dioxide</div><div>restrictions as coordinating lead author for its climate report, even the most naïve</div><div>observer can see the fix is in regarding IPCC’s 2013 report.”</div><div>Taylor is wrong on the science and wrong on the attacks.</div><div>.</div><div>Z.2010.09-4 Advertisement, half-page ~ Z.2010.08-9a</div><div>Global Warming Sham Shirts! IRS-3E</div><div>Z.2010.09-6 Heartland ad, quarter-page</div><div>Let’s Look at the Science, by Joseph Bast IRS-0E</div><div>“What causes climate change? Is it man? That’s one theory. But few people</div><div>realize it’s not the only one. At least six other theories also enjoy support in the</div><div>scientific community. As confidence in the theory of human-caused global</div><div>warming erodes, this dispassionate account by THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE</div><div>reviews the theories and their contributions to our understanding of climate</div><div>change.”</div><div>This is freely available.930</div><div>Z.2010.09-7 Krstle Russin</div><div>Perry Fights for State Oversight of Natural Gas</div><div>“Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) has gone on the offensive against potential federal</div><div>government plans to regulate natural gas production through hydraulic fracturing</div><div>techniques. …</div><div>Kathleen White, director of the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s Center for</div><div>Natural Resources and former chair of the Texas Commission for Environmental</div><div>Quality, says Perry is justified in his concern over federal</div><div>intervention.</div><div>“EPA is outside the reach of its own laws,” said White. “The EPA under the</div><div>Obama administration, unlike any other administrations I have seen, is really</div><div>stepping outside rubrics in which they have operated with state regulators.</div><div>
</div><div>930 heartland.org/policy-documents/7-theories-climate-change</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>194</div><div>Z.2010.09-10 2 Thomas Cheplick</div><div>Royal Society Reexamines Global Warming Position.931</div><div>“The Royal Society of Great Britain, generally considered the nation’s most</div><div>prestigious scientific society, has announced it will conduct a review of a</div><div>previous public statement supporting the claims of global warming alarmists.</div><div>That statement had declared the “debate on climate change is over” and the</div><div>planet is becoming disastrously warmer due to human emissions of carbon</div><div>dioxide. The Royal Society is reexamining its position after a growing number of</div><div>member scientists expressed disagreement with the position of its leadership.</div><div>…”</div><div>932</div><div>“Professor Bob Carter of the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at</div><div>James Cook University in Queensland, Australia finds the Royal Society’s</div><div>backtracking on global warming alarmism surprising, but recognizes it shouldn’t</div><div>be.”</div><div>933</div><div>
</div><div>931 royalsociety.org/policy/climate-change/reports-statements The PDF:</div><div>“There is strong evidence that the warming of the Earth over the last half-century</div><div>has been caused largely by human activity, such as the burning of fossil fuels and</div><div>changes in land use, including agriculture and deforestation.”</div><div>Does Cheplick have the slightest relevant experience for this topic?</div><div>932 Any learned society has a small percentage who manage to let ideology</div><div>override science [MAS2009] and Z.2010.08-16 and complain. See RS section:</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change</div><div>In this case, it was a few RS retirees with no climate expertise (private</div><div>communication.) Most science societies are expected to have position statements</div><div>on topics within their expertise and most update them periodically. One might</div><div>think from Cheplick’s wording that the RS used “alarmists.” They did not.</div><div>933 Carter is Adjunct Professorial Research Fellow at James Cook U, Townsville:</div><div>www.jcu.edu.au/ees/staff/az/JCUDEV_014954.html</div><div>He is a marine geologist who writes widely about climate, just not credibly in</div><div>peer-reviewed science journals. He is involved in various free-market and climate</div><div>anti-science activities, including those of Heartland.</div><div>www.desmogblog.com/rm-bob-carter; en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M.Carter</div><div>Lord May’s C.V. has Princeton, Imperial College, Oxford, 3 of the world’s best:</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_May,Baron_May_of_Oxford</div><div>By comparison, Carter’s academic credentials are weak, and few would have ever</div><div>heard of him except for his active campaign against mainstream science and thus</div><div>acting a reliable source of quotes. I’ve lectured for JCU Townsville, and it</div><div>seemed a decent middling school, but it is not Princeton, Imperial College or</div><div>Oxford (where I’ve lectured, as well.) For Australian university rankings, see:</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_Australia</div><div>“Carter noted Lord Robert May, who was president of the society when its</div><div>statement was issued, is a vocal proponent of global warming alarmism. Now</div><div>that May is no longer president of the society, its leadership is listening more to</div><div>the member scientists, who are much more skeptical of alarmist claims than May</div><div>was.”</div><div>‘Taken over by climate zealot’ IRS-3E</div><div>Carter did not mince words in describing May’s influence on the Royal Society’s</div><div>global warming position in overcoming the differing opinion of member</div><div>scientists.“Leadership of the society was taken over by an opinionated</div><div>Australian, climate-zealot President Robert May, who believes it is the role of</div><div>scientific societies to provide political advice,” said Carter. The society’s</div><div>decision to reexamine its position “is also almost certainly[the result of] a large</div><div>majority of reputable scientists who have long since seen through the [global</div><div>warming] scam,” he added.’</div><div>‘“The Royal Society matter was only newsworthy because as a society we are so</div><div>fixated on authority figures, and the Royal Society is seen as the impeccable</div><div>authority figure. In actuality, over the last 20 years the Royal Society has</div><div>transmuted from an impartial science academy into a politically active agency, as</div><div>has the National Academy of Sciences[in the United States],” said Carter.’</div><div>934</div><div>‘Authorities Losing credibility</div><div>Professor Thomas Derr935 of Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts says</div><div>the Royal Society hurt its prestigious reputation by so ardently embracing a</div><div>theory unsupported by concrete evidence. By declaring the scientifically</div><div>controversial theory as fact, the society diminished its reputation as an objective</div><div>scientific organization, Derr says. Even so, Derr suspects the Royal Society will</div><div>not fully recant its mistake.</div><div>“For some time the Royal Society, whose pride is in open inquiry and scientific</div><div>doubt, has been under fire for touting the anthropogenic global warming thesis</div><div>without any care for proper scientific method—in effect trashing its heritage,”</div><div>said Derr. “The recent hints of remorse are worth investigation, but don’t expect</div><div>anything like recantation. Human nature doesn’t allow that.”</div><div>Derr noted the desire for grant money to study climate change usually acts as a</div><div>deterrent to these “in-the-field” scientists being skeptical of the global warming</div><div>theory.</div><div>“The pursuit of grants and prestige does not favor skepticism. For a while people</div><div>noted that biologists who wanted research grants always stuck into their project</div><div>
</div><div>934 After getting a degree from Cambridge, Carter’s career has been spent in New</div><div>Zealand and Australia, not the UK or US, but freelance writer Cheplick relies on</div><div>him. Then he shifts to another person of dubious relevance.</div><div>935 Derr is a Professor Emeritus of Religion and Biblical Literature, which</div><div>Cheplick failed to note. Derr is included in §X.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>195</div><div>proposal the hope that it might help cancer research, even if that was pretty</div><div>marginal, [but it] helped to get approval. It’s the same thing now for global</div><div>warming: It is the cause that produces the money,” Derr explained.’</div><div>“Michaels Predicts Whitewash</div><div>Patrick Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC,</div><div>says the Royal Society has too much already invested in global warming</div><div>alarmism to back down substantially from its prior statement. While finding it</div><div>necessary to reexamine its prior statement in light of a backlash from member</div><div>scientists, the organization’s leadership will inevitably affirm its prior statement</div><div>after making a few tweaks here and there, he says.</div><div>The Royal Society’s review of its public statements will likely be a whitewash,</div><div>says Michaels, just as reviews by Penn State University and the U.K.’s East</div><div>Anglia University whitewashed misconduct perpetrated by its faculty in the</div><div>Climategate scandal.”</div><div>936</div><div>.</div><div>Z.2010.09-11 Cheryl K. Chumley ~Z2008.09-9</div><div>Latest IPCC Scandal: Exaggerated Sea Level Claims937</div><div>“A Dutch environmental agency has confirmed the most recent assessment</div><div>report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change made</div><div>overly alarmist sea level claims regarding the Netherlands. The Netherlands</div><div>Environmental Assessment Agency (NEAA) admitted IPCC relied on inflated</div><div>numbers NEAA had supplied, claiming 55 percent of the Netherlands is below</div><div>sea level when the true figure is only 26 percent.</div><div>NEAA now says it meant to say 55 percent of the country was prone to flooding.</div><div>… The scandal is just the latest in a series of important mistakes and deceptions</div><div>that have surfaced in IPCC’s most recent report …”</div><div>Z.2010.09-11 Alyssa Carducci938</div><div>California Assembly Votes to Ban Plastic Shopping Bags</div><div>Quotes: Tom Tanton (T2 & Associates)</div><div>Heartland usually supports states’ rights versus the Federal government,</div><div>except for any state that wants to pass environmentally-related laws.</div><div>
</div><div>936 Some of these comments seem libelous.</div><div>937 For comments by experts who actually know something about this:</div><div>www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/02/ipcc-errors-facts-and-spin</div><div>938 “Alyssa Carducci writes from Tampa, Florida.”</div><div>Does she have any special expertise regarding California?</div><div>Z.2010.09-16 James M. Taylor</div><div>Can All States Be ‘Particularly Vulnerable’ to Global Warming?</div><div>“One of the most frequent tricks used by global warming alarmists to</div><div>induce a state legislature to pass costly carbon dioxide restrictions is to claim the</div><div>state is “particularly vulnerable” to global warming for various reasons,</div><div>justifying costly, state-specific action.</div><div>Many states in the US are particularly vulnerable to climate change,</div><div>although the reasons vary.</div><div>939</div><div> The US is rich partly because it has a long</div><div>temperate coastline with particularly-developed sea-level infrastructure</div><div>(sea level rise) and a huge interior river system (floods). Increased</div><div>temperature not only exacerbates SouthWest droughts, but changes moves</div><div>precipitation further North, often into states already prone to flooding.</div><div>Higher temperatures lessen snowpack for some states, especially</div><div>California, Oregon, Washington. Even the SouthEast has water problems.</div><div>Z.2010.09-16a James M. Taylor</div><div>Peer-Reviewed Studies Refute Alarmist Drought Claims</div><div>“As prominent alarmist Gavin Schmidt—a colleague of alarmist James Hansen</div><div>at NASA’s Goddard Institute …”</div><div>Z.2010.09-16b Regnery advertisement, quarter-page</div><div>“POWER GRAB, by Chris Horner</div><div>How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America”</div><div>Z.2010.09-17 Paul Driessen</div><div>Penn State Exonerates Michael Mann</div><div>“Bogus science is used to justify energy and environmental policies, laws,</div><div>treaties, court decisions, and subsidies that will enrich some, bankrupt others,</div><div>control our lives, and send millions of jobs overseas. Meanwhile, Virginia</div><div>Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s investigation into academic fraud is heatedly</div><div>denounced by the very academics and institutions that refuse to conduct honest</div><div>investigations of their own.” IRS-3E</div><div>In the real world, Mann has been investigated and exonerated multiple</div><div>times, including by the National Science Foundation’s OIG.940</div><div>
</div><div>939 www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/us-impacts</div><div>940 physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/47043</div><div>www.science20.com/uploads/1770191916-429173860.pdf</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>196</div><div>Z.2010.10941</div><div>Z.2010.10-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Environmental extremism takes ugly turn</div><div>Z.2010.10-1a James M. Taylor</div><div>Auditor Bashes U.N. Climate Panel</div><div>Actually, not.942</div><div>Z.2010.10-5 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>New York Senate Passes Fracking Moratorium Bill</div><div>‘“These moratoria are a reaction to a problem that doesn’t exist, and they are</div><div>causing serious economic damage not only to New York but to the country as a</div><div>whole.”’</div><div>Gary Stone, Vice President of Engineering, Five States Energy”</div><div>The jury is still out on fracking, since it depends on the sites and the care of the</div><div>operators. It may well work safely in many places. Someone who might make</div><div>much money from fracking says it is safe.943 If it lessens use of coal, many would</div><div>support it. Is it irrational that people would like to be assured of safety of their</div><div>water? From experience across this region, fossil companies have sometimes been</div><div>optimistic about the safety of their activities?</div><div>Z.2010.10-7 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>New Mexico Considers Greenhouse Gas Restrictions</div><div>‘“If man-made climate change actually exists, it is a global issue, not a</div><div>local one.” – Thom Moore, Farmer, Clovis New Mexico</div><div>Mexico is hot and dry and it will get more so, so this may be a more local</div><div>issue than he thinks.944</div><div>
</div><div>941heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/28462.pdf</div><div>942 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/08/ipcc-report-card</div><div>943 I used to work for the US Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh Mining Research Center.</div><div>In coal country around Pittsburgh, PA, houses still collapsed decades later from</div><div>long-abandoned mines. Many Appalachian streams had runoff problems. Fossil</div><div>companies may or not be right on fracking, but not everyone in the region</div><div>automatically trusts them.</div><div>944 www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/usimpacts/regional-climate-change-impacts/southwest</div><div>Z.2010.10-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Coal Emissions Are Falling Dramatically, EPA Reports945</div><div>“The new EPA data show switching from affordable coal to expensive</div><div>alternative energy sources is unnecessary to reduce air pollution levels.”</div><div>Z.2010.10-9 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Michigan Ponders its Future as an Energy Producer</div><div>Z.2010.10-10 G. Cornelius van Kooten946</div><div>
</div><div>Has 2009-2010 Been the Warmest Period Ever?</div><div>Van Kooten seemed unaware that global temperature analysis is global,</div><div>not the US Lower-48 or Stockholm.947 He thought CRU used the same</div><div>underlying data as NASA GISS, but GISS also includes the Arctic, one of</div><div>the fastest-warming areas. He might want to stick to economics, §Y.1.</div><div>The top 15 global temperature anomalies were, via NASA GISS:948</div><div>2010 0.86 2002 0.71 2008 0.58</div><div>2005 0.80 2003 0.71 1995 0.51</div><div>2007 0.79 2006 0.71 1999 0.51</div><div>1998 0.77 2004 0.63 2000 0.50</div><div>2009 0.73 2001 0.61 1997 0.47</div><div>Z.2010.10-12 James M. Taylor</div><div>Study Debunks Link Between Global Warming, Blizzards</div><div>BBC has a better article.</div><div>949</div><div> While it is difficult to prove the exact causes</div><div>for any given weather event, global warming puts more moisture in the air.</div><div>The likely result is more snow or bigger storms, over the long term.</div><div>
</div><div>945 Maybe that has something to do with the sort of regulations that Heartland</div><div>normally fights, although other reasons may contribute. Example:</div><div>texasvox.org/2011/07/15/new-epa-standards-for-coal-plant-emissions-alreadyworking-to-clear-our-skies</div><div>946 “G. Cornelis van Kooten is professor and Canada Research Chair at the</div><div>University of Victoria Department of Economics and is coeditor of the Canadian</div><div>Journal of Agricultural Economics.”</div><div>947 I do not have the articles he mentioned, maybe they were confused also.</div><div>948 data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs3 has Global Annual Mean Surface Air</div><div>Temperature, whose tabular data is: data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs3</div><div>949 www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11152077</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>197</div><div>Z.2010.10-13 James M. Taylor</div><div>IPCC Coordinating Author Gary Yohe Not Objective IRS-3E,</div><div>‘In a 2009 article published by The Yale Forum on Climate Change & The</div><div>Media, Yohe argued news reporters should blackball skeptics and report only</div><div>alarmist views and quote only alarmist scientists regarding global warming.’</div><div>Said Yohe, “when it’s a scientific argument, when there’s 99 on one side and</div><div>one on the other, it makes no sense to cover both sides.’</div><div>Would Taylor think that in an argument whether children should smoke,</div><div>medical researchers should be balanced by Joe Camel? Meme-146</div><div>Z.2010.10-15 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Book Is a Valuable Source of In-Depth Energy Information950</div><div>Power Hungry: The Myths of “Green” Energy and the Real Fuels of the</div><div>Future by Robert Bryce, Public Affairs, 2010</div><div>Z.2010.10-18 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>West Virginia, EPA Clash over Mountaintop Mining</div><div>‘“Coal is America’s most plentiful natural energy resource,” said former</div><div>Virginia Sen. George Allen, chairman of the American Energy Freedom Center.</div><div>“Affordable, reliable electricity generated by clean coal technologies is essential</div><div>for our quality of life.</div><div>“Unnecessary burdens imposed on American coal will mean fewer jobs, a less</div><div>competitive country, higher electricity prices, and a lower standard of living,”</div><div>Allen added.’</div><div>Having grown up at edge of coal country in Western Pennsylvania, I hope</div><div>fracking works well, I’d much rather have gas than coal. But fossil</div><div>companies have sometimes been a bit “careless” and accidents happen.951</div><div>
</div><div>950 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bryce%28writer%29</div><div>Was at IER, is a Senior Fellow at Manhattan Institute.</div><div>thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/09/14/206723/power-hungry-robert-bryce-debunkin</div><div>951 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Blankenship was a fine example.</div><div>I used to work at the US Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh Mining Research Center and</div><div>my first technical report described software I wrote to help analyze coal. Mine</div><div>collapses sometimes caused trouble decades after the mines had closed and the</div><div>companies departed. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion</div><div>Z.2010.11952</div><div>Z.2010.11.3 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Senators Consider Expensive Renewable Energy Mandates</div><div>Z.2010.11.4 Kenneth Artz</div><div>Texas Presents New Challenge to EPA Warming Rules</div><div>The “UN group “is a tiny central administrative group. Most work is done</div><div>by volunteer scientists, including some from Texas. Multiple credible</div><div>groups get similar answers. The State of Texas does not seem to read</div><div>USGCRP.953</div><div>Z.2010.11.4a Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Green Jobs Promises Dwindle as Obama Policies Backfire</div><div>Z.2010.11-6 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Drilling Moratorium in Delaware River Basin Sparks Public Criticism</div><div>Z.2010.11.7 Kenneth Artz</div><div>GE Closes Its Last U.S. Incandescent Light Bulb Plant</div><div>Quotes: H. Sterling Burnett, Sam Kazman (CEI).</div><div>Z.2010.11-8 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Environmental Mandates Flame Out in California</div><div>Z.2010.11.8a Kenneth Artz</div><div>American Indian Tribes Protest Proposed Solar Power Complex</div><div>Quotes: Tom Tanton</div><div>
</div><div>952heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/28620.pdf</div><div>953 www.globalchange.gov/publications/reports/scientific-assessments/usimpacts/regional-climate-change-impacts/southwest</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>198</div><div>Z.2010.11.9 Kenneth Artz</div><div>Democrats Make Global Warming a Campaign Issue</div><div>“Feingold made those claims even though solar scientist Willie Soon of the</div><div>prestigious Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has shown the Earth’s</div><div>recent temperature history almost exactly matches variations in solar output.”</div><div>Willie Soon has been wrong so often, he is not worth debunking, Meme-01.</div><div>Z.2010.11.10 Craig D. Idso</div><div>NIPCC Seeks Contributing Authors for Next Report</div><div>Z.2010.11.10a Craig D. Idso</div><div>Warming Will Benefit Marine Life954</div><div>Maybe, Idso omitted some of the caveats in the actual abstract.955</div><div> In</div><div>addition, Australia is not necessarily the whole world.</div><div>Z.2010.11.11 Craig D. Idso</div><div>Study Shows No Increase in Eastern U.S. Floods</div><div>Z.2010.11.16 John Dale Dunn</div><div>UCLA Fires Prof for Attacking Environmental Health Myths956</div><div>Z.2010.11.17 Maureen Martin</div><div>Electric Cars Threaten Energy Independence</div><div>Z.2010.11.18 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Climate of Corruption Exposed IRS-3E</div><div>“Climate of Corruption is amazing. Prestigious scientist Larry Bell’s</div><div>research into how global warming alarmists use the issue to enrich</div><div>themselves and gain power and influence is more detailed and</div><div>thorough than any I have ever read.</div><div>The book reads like an investigative report of undercover operations</div><div>proving beyond any reasonable doubt that scores of pieces of</div><div>
</div><div>954 www.nipccreport.org/articles/2010/sep/14sep2010a5.html</div><div>955 www.mendeley.com/research/effects-of-climatedriven-primary-productionchange-on-marine-food-webs-implications-for-fisheries-and-conservation</div><div>956 www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=James_E.Enstrom Tobacco</div><div>Despite having no obvious connection with climate science, he signed the APS</div><div>petition, as discussed in MAS2009, pp.89-90.</div><div>information presented as “facts” by alarmists are in fact deceitful lies with no</div><div>supporting evidence.</div><div>Larry Bell is a professor of space architecture (as in orbiting satellites) at the</div><div>University of Houston. There are few more famous space scientists than Bell,</div><div>who has won every imaginable international award from space agencies, as well</div><div>as many prestigious teaching awards. His entrepreneurial bent has led him to</div><div>found a number of space-related companies that grew to thousands of</div><div>employees.</div><div>During the course of his work regarding hostile environments on planetary</div><div>bodies, Bell met the equally accomplished and prestigious scientist Fred Singer.</div><div>Singer inspired Bell to research global warming, which led to Bell writing</div><div>Climate of Corruption. We are all the better off for it, as Bell has placed the</div><div>myriad facets of the global warming movement into a scholarly yet easily</div><div>readable text recounting every aspect of this greatest of all earthly scams.</div><div>Identifies Beneficiaries of Scare</div><div>Climate of Corruption answers such questions as: Are global warming myths</div><div>such as declining polar bear populations and more frequent hurricanes really</div><div>happening? Why and how are some of the world’s most prestigious science</div><div>institutions cashing in on the alarm? Who stands to benefit most by promoting</div><div>public climate change alarmism? What true political and financial purposes are</div><div>served by the vilification of carbon dioxide? How do climate deceptions promote</div><div>grossly exaggerated claims for carbon-free alternative energy and advance</div><div>blatant global wealth redistribution goals?</div><div>Climate of Corruption is the most important book you can read on the global</div><div>warming scam. There have been many excellent books making the case for</div><div>sound science and the fact that man has no real measurable control over his</div><div>climate, but now Larry Bell has uncovered through outstanding investigative</div><div>reporting why and how this scam has been so successful for nearly 20 years.</div><div>This is a great read for folks with an open mind. Climate realists are beginning to</div><div>win the battle over global warming alarmism, and this book could gain us the</div><div>final nine yards.”</div><div>Bell is frequently wrong, but seems a master of the “gish gallup”</div><div>957</div><div>Z.2010.11.18a Donn Dears</div><div>California Voters May Repeal Greenhouse Gas Restrictions</div><div>Valero, Tesoro and Koch Industries funded Prop 23, but it was soundly</div><div>defeated (62% to 38%), in part due to George Shultz’s efforts.</div><div>
</div><div>957 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/01/forbes-rich-list-of-nonsense </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>199</div><div>Z.2011 7 issues</div><div>Z.2011.01958</div><div>Z.2011.01-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA Issues Controversial Greenhouse Gas Guidance</div><div>Quotes: H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Z.2011.01-1a Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Obama Administration Misled Public on Drilling Ban</div><div>Z.2011.01-2 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Claimed Carbon Emission Cuts in Europe Are Deceiving</div><div>Z.2011.01-3 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Lead in Reusable Bags Raises Concerns</div><div>This headline might confuse people into thinking this applied to most</div><div>reusable (cloth) bags, not just the specific brand of polypropylene bag.</div><div>Lead is a legitimate concern, as is mercury, but Heartland only seems to</div><div>worry about them in reusable bags or CFLs.</div><div>Z.2011.01-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Voters Punish Supporters of Global Warming Restrictions</div><div>Election results depend on more than one position and in fact, a very good</div><div>researcher’s polls say otherwise.959</div><div>Z.2011.01-4a James M. Taylor</div><div>Pew Global Warming Poll Shows Rise in Public Skepticism</div><div>Again, other credible results say otherwise.</div><div>Z.2011.01-9 Advertisement, full page</div><div>CPAC | 2011 Conservative Political Action Conference</div><div>
</div><div>958heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/28985.pdf</div><div>959 woods.stanford.edu/research/climate-views-elections.html</div><div>Jon Krosnick is a Professor at Stanford.</div><div>woods.stanford.edu/docs/surveys/Global-Warming-Survey-Stanford-ReutersSeptember-2011.pdf</div><div>Z.2011.01-10 D. Brady Nelson960</div><div>Scientific American Poll Shows Readers Are Skeptical</div><div>‘Readers of the Scientific American Web site overwhelmingly believe humans</div><div>are not causing a global warming crisis, according to a poll posted on October</div><div>25. …</div><div>Joanne Nova, a former associate lecturer at Australia National University who</div><div>helped develop the university’s Graduate Diploma in Science Communication,</div><div>noted the irony of Scientific American, which has consistently advocated global</div><div>warming alarmism, publishing a poll in which its readers were overwhelmingly</div><div>skeptical.</div><div>“What the survey tells us is that thousands of people who are interested in the</div><div>global warming debate are telling the magazine to get its act together and start</div><div>reporting on empirical evidence rather than opinions,” Nova said. “If their</div><div>subscriptions are falling, the recent survey is sending them the answer, and it’s</div><div>written in a six-foot-high font that’s on fire!””</div><div>This was a seriously-incompetent poll, as the questions were poorlyworded</div><div>and repeat voting was allowed.961</div><div>Quotes: Pat Michaels (CATO), Joanne Nova</div><div>Z.2011.01-11 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Tropical Rainforests Benefited from Past Rapid Warming, Study</div><div>Says962</div><div>“Tropical rainforests experienced sensational growth and an explosive increase</div><div>in biodiversity during a period of rapid global warming 56 million years ago,</div><div>scientists report in the journal Science.</div><div>The findings refute forecasts of imminent global warming-induced tropical</div><div>rainforest demise published by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on</div><div>Climate Change (IPCC) and provide strong evidence that many of the benefits of</div><div>warming temperatures that occurred during the twentieth century are likely to</div><div>continue for the foreseeable future.”</div><div>No, they do not refute concerns, they give data about a specific event under</div><div>very different conditions. During PETM963 temperatures rose ~6C (11F) in</div><div>₂₀,000 years, which leaves more time for adaption than 200-300 years.</div><div>
</div><div>960 “D. Brady Nelson is a Milwaukee-based freelance economist.”</div><div>Perhaps he does not understand the ways online polls can be “gamed.”</div><div>961 thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/10/26/206933/scientific-american-jumps-theshark-online-polls-judith-curry</div><div>blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2010/10/28/misreading-climatechange-on-scientific-american</div><div>
</div><div>962 www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6006/957.full</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>200</div><div>Z.2011.01-1a Heartland half-page ad</div><div>Exactly What the Tea Party Needs Right Now!964</div><div>“The new “Tea Party patriots” recognize that basic American ideals and</div><div>historical practice are under attack. …. They are echoing the ideas of the</div><div>American Founders including John Adams, Benjamin Franklin965, Alexander</div><div>Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George</div><div>Washington.” pp.3-4</div><div>“Chapter 1: “Health Care Reform” shows how we can attain better health</div><div>care at lower cost by repealing unnecessary regulations, …”966</div><div>Chapter 2: “Energy and Environment” .. shows how environmental advocacy</div><div>groups have exaggerated the alleged threats of global warming, air pollution, and</div><div>mercury.” Joseph Bast. p.47-</div><div>“Probably two-thirds of the warming in the 1990s was due to natural causes; the</div><div>warming trend has already stopped and forecasts of future warming are</div><div>unreliable; and the benefits of a moderate warming are likely to outweigh the</div><div>costs.” p.55. Meme-07</div><div>Z.2011.01-13 S. Fred Singer</div><div>French Academy Lays a Warming Egg</div><div>“Even more important, weather satellite data, which furnish the best global=</div><div>temperature data for the atmosphere, show essentially no warming between 1979</div><div>and 1997.”</div><div>In 1997, UAH showed little warming, because Spencer and Christy’s code</div><div>was buggy, then RSS found errors in 1998 and afterwards. See §Y.1.</div><div>Z.2011.01-15 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Scientist Spencer Makes Climate Science Understandable</div><div>“The Great Global Warming Blunder:</div><div>How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists</div><div>By Roy W. Spencer</div><div>Encounter Books, 2010</div><div>
</div><div>963 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene%E2%80%93Eocene_Thermal_Maximum</div><div>964 heartland.org/policy-documents/patriots-toolbox 2010</div><div>965 Franklin and Jefferson were good scientists and founders of fine universities.</div><div>966 The only mention of tobacco was much later, i.e., in avoidance of “sin taxes.”</div><div>There is always room to argue about policy. One even might agree with some of</div><div>this book, but when a tobacco-defender writes about health with no mention of</div><div>tobacco, then states blatant untruths about climate, why would one trust him?</div><div>“Roy Spencer, one of the nation’s leading climate scientists,967 says he’s</div><div>frustrated that activists have hijacked the peer-review process to prevent the</div><div>publication of sound science968 contradicting global warming alarmism….</div><div>We all owe Roy Spencer great thanks for his courage in telling it like it is from</div><div>his position as one of the most prominent and accomplished climate scientists of</div><div>our day.”</div><div>969</div><div>Z.2011.01-15b Heartland quarter-page ad</div><div>Global Warming – Facts versus Faith, Walter Cunningham</div><div>“There is a war going on between those who believe that human activities are</div><div>responsible for global warming and those who don’t,” writes former Apollo 7</div><div>astronaut Walter Cunningham in this concise booklet. He goes on to explain the</div><div>science, insisting that “in the end, science will win.”</div><div>Fred Singer writes:</div><div>“A beautifully written and easy to understand factual account that debunks</div><div>climate alarmism.”</div><div>This is very sad.</div><div>Z.2011.01-16 D. Brady Nelson</div><div>Solar Subsidies Squandered, Australian Study Says</div><div>Z.2011.01-16a James M. Taylor</div><div>Even Arizona Called Poor Choice for Solar Power</div><div>Z.2011.01-18 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Kentucky Challenges EPA Restrictions on Mining</div><div>Z.2011.01-18a Jay Lehr</div><div>It’s Time to Trust the States with Environmental Protection970</div><div>““[T]he continued actions by the EPA are of concern in that the coal industry’s</div><div>ability to do business is greatly diminished by the actions of the EPA that do not,</div><div>in our opinion, follow protocol.”</div><div>Dick Brown, Communications, Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet</div><div>
</div><div>967 No he is not, but he has certainly made many well-documented errors.</div><div>968 “sound science” was invented by Philip Morris and TASSC to confuse people.</div><div>969 But badly wrong, again and again.</div><div>970 Except any state like California, and especially California that wants to use its</div><div>legal rights to mandate more stringent rules than Federal. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>201</div><div>Z.2011.02971</div><div>Z.2011.02-01 James M. Taylor</div><div>Cancun Climate Talks Fizzle, But U.S. Agrees to Pricey New Program</div><div>Z.2011.02-02 Craig D. Idso</div><div>Canadian Butterflies Expand Range as Climate Warms972</div><div>Z.2011.02-04 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>China Cuts Rare-Earth Exports, Hitting Wind, Solar Power</div><div>Z.2011.02-04a Advertisement, quarter-page</div><div>A Primer on Renewable Energy</div><div>Hayden is a retired atomic physicist, a 2009 APS Petition signer.</div><div>973 His</div><div>self-published book, “A Primer on CO2 and Climate,” is unusually poor.</div><div>He accepts the views from a pseudoscience article by Ernst-George Beck.</div><div>974 Beck tried to show that wild variations of measured CO2 concentrations</div><div>were not measurement problems, but real (contrary to impossibility of the</div><div>large carbon fluxes required, and in total contradiction to multiple ice-core</div><div>records and much other data), and coincidentally just stabilized exactly</div><div>when modern methods appeared.</div><div>Z.2011.02-05 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Marine Life Rebounds in Wake of Gulf Oil Spill</div><div>Z.2011.02-05a Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Mass. Enacts, Calif. Rejects, BPA Ban</div><div>Heartland says BPA is no problem.</div><div>
</div><div>971heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/29250.pdf</div><div>972Odd, since Heartland has for years tried to minimize the idea of warming.</div><div>973 MAS2009 pp.88-89, which may hint at motivations.</div><div>974 www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=E.G.Beck</div><div>It is hard to believe that anyone with a PhD in Physics could take Beck seriously</div><div>for more than a few minutes.. Hayden also references another truly awful paper:</div><div>www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=G.Gerlich_and_R.D.Tscheuschner</div><div>MAS2011f p.4 shows his relationships with Singer and others.</div><div>Z.2011.02-6 Heartland ad, full-page</div><div>This could be your last issue of Environment & Climate News!</div><div>Print edition is no longer free, except for elected officials.</div><div>Z.2011.02-8 Kenneth Artz</div><div>NY Delegation Challenges EPA’s Chesapeake Bay Rules</div><div>‘EPA’s new restrictions are just one more example of the Obama</div><div>administration’s executive overreach, says H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow</div><div>for environment policy at the National Center for Policy Analysis. “The</div><div>administration seems to have a ‘damn the consequences, full speed ahead’</div><div>attitude when it comes to environmental regulations,” regardless of the economic</div><div>costs, said Burnett.</div><div>Burnett noted, “the Obama administration habitually takes the side of stricter</div><div>rules supported by the environmental lobby” even when they are opposed by</div><div>state governments and consumer groups. “Whether it’s greenhouse gas</div><div>regulations, revisions of the ozone standards and clean air permitting decisions,</div><div>endangered species listings and delistings, offshore oil and gas production, or</div><div>clean water regulations concerning total maximum daily loads, in every instance</div><div>the Obama administration pays off the environmental lobby at the expense of</div><div>sound science and the economy,” said Burnett.</div><div>“While the president says job creation and getting the economy back on track is</div><div>job one, his actions say just the opposite. Each of these regulations and increased</div><div>standards are job killers with little or no demonstrable environmental or public</div><div>health benefit. Rarely has an administration been so dedicated to environmental</div><div>activist orthodoxy even when it flies in the face of state needs and economic</div><div>progress,” Burnett explained.’</div><div>Z.2011.02-11 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>San Jose, Los Angeles County Ban Plastic Shopping Bags</div><div>Z.2011.02-13 Donn Dears</div><div>Electric Cars Still Show Little Promise (mostly repeats O’Keefe975)</div><div>‘“Electric Cars: Not ready for prime time,” William O’Keefe, George C.</div><div>Marshall institute:’</div><div>
</div><div>975 O’Keefe was a 25-year veteran of the American Petroleum Institute, § X..</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>202</div><div>Z.2011.02-14 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Activists Target Important Agricultural Fertilizer</div><div>Phosphates are important, so is water supply.976</div><div>Z.2011.02-15 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>The Energy Primer for Kids: With a Primer: for Grown-ups By Vladislav</div><div>Bevc977</div><div>“Children these days are bombarded by nonstop propaganda claiming Western</div><div>nations and market economies are destroying the Earth. Not often do children</div><div>encounter a book that encourages critical thinking about such emotional</div><div>environmental claims and the inevitable prescription of expensive renewable</div><div>energy to solve the fictitious problem.</div><div>Vladislav Bevc’s book The Energy Primer for Kids: With a Primer for Grownups</div><div>is a superb exception: an informative and important 57-page paperback that</div><div>cuts through alarmist environmental propaganda in a manner children will find</div><div>interesting and memorable. … Children and their parents are shown how to spot</div><div>the flaws in the deluge of propaganda and make informed energy and</div><div>environmental decisions as citizens and voters. IRS-3E</div><div>In the process of cutting through antimarket environmental propaganda, … This</div><div>time-tested method of truth-seeking unfortunately has been subjected to extreme</div><div>hostility by global warming alarmists who demonize all who would question</div><div>their speculative theories. … This statement precedes an excellent explanation of</div><div>the global warming fraud.” IRS-3E</div><div>In 2009, Bevc wrote a letter to APS that included:978</div><div>“Unfortunately it cannot be established where the carbon dioxide in the</div><div>atmosphere is coming from and this leaves the field wide open for speculations a</div><div>la Hafemeister and Schwartz.”</div><div>Human sources of CO2 are well-enough understood, as Hafemeister and</div><div>Schwartz said in their reply. That is really basic climate science and Bevc</div><div>clearly did not understand it. Bevc wrote in Joanne Nova’s blog:979</div><div>“An excellent publication. I would like to have a dozen because once a month I</div><div>have a table at the Farmers Market in Danville and hand out information on the</div><div>“climate change” issue debunking the alarmist claims.”</div><div>
</div><div>976 florida.sierraclub.org/phosphate.asp</div><div>977 MAS2009 p.80. He was a typical signer of the APS Petition. Born in 1938, he</div><div>worked in plasmas and defense, with no obvious climate research.</div><div>978 www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200904/bevc.cfm</div><div>979 joannenova.com.au/2008/09/about-the-sceptics-handbook 06/12/09 #113</div><div>www.realclimate.org/wiki/index.php?title=Joanne_Nova slick, but very wrong.</div><div>skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2009/05/upper-stratosphere-cooling.html</div><div>Z.2011.02-16 Roger Cohen</div><div>Global Warming in 2010: The Heat Came from Politics, Not Mother</div><div>Nature</div><div>Roger Cohen was a long time ExxonMobil employee, now retired, and one</div><div>of the 6 organizers of the 2009 APS Petition [MAS2009].</div><div>“These are natural cycles, and the trend over the past 10 to 15 years remains</div><div>flat.” Meme-02, Meme-07</div><div>This is statistical illiteracy. Anyone who knows anything about climate</div><div>knows that 20-30 years are needed. See Z.2010.10-10: even by the (low)</div><div>UAH numbers, the last 10 years have seen 9 of the 10 highest temperatures</div><div>in the satellite record (with 1998 in place of 2008). Some people keep</div><div>changing the “last N years” to somehow start around 1998, an</div><div>exceptionally-warm El Nino.</div><div>“Then my friend and colleague in physics, Hal Lewis, became an instant folk</div><div>hero when he issued his public letter resigning from the American Physical</div><div>Society. Hal was chairman of the Defense Science Board Panel on Nuclear</div><div>Winter and chaired the APS Reactor Safety Study. The letter contained scathing</div><div>indictments of the bogus science and moneyed interests driving the politics.</div><div>The event was hailed by skeptics and sent alarmism advocates scurrying to</div><div>muster their character assassination techniques.”</div><div>Lewis was another organizer of the APS Petition.980 He was a nuclear</div><div>physicist born in 1927 and well-connected with GMI people. [MAS2009]</div><div>noted that the distribution of signers was heavily skewed towards older</div><div>males. He may have been a folk hero to the angry old men who signed.</div><div>Did anyone else care about his resignation?</div><div>“Finally, running ahead of its elected leaders, the American public became yet</div><div>more skeptical about global warming despite the 20-year media fear barrage. A</div><div>recent Scientific American poll981 of its presumably scientifically literate readers</div><div>found 78 percent think climate change is caused by solar variation or natural</div><div>processes, and 69 percent think we should do nothing about climate change. 21</div><div>social and economic issues confronting Americans, global warming ranks last in</div><div>importance. It is now safe to say the skeptic community has sealed the fate of the</div><div>old climate dogma. The dogmatists still defend themselves with increasing</div><div>shrillness, but that only serves to further isolate it and erode its credibility.”</div><div>IRS-3E</div><div>
</div><div>980 MAS2009 pp.107-108.</div><div>981 It was a poorly-implemented poll. Z.2011.01-10. </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>203</div><div>Z.2011.02-17 S. Fred Singer</div><div>Secondhand Smoke, Lung Cancer, and the Global Warming Debate</div><div>‘In 1993 the U.S. Environmental</div><div>Protection Agency published a report</div><div>claiming secondhand smoke (SHS—also</div><div>sometimes known as environmental</div><div>tobacco smoke or ETS) causes 3,000</div><div>deaths from lung cancer every year in the United States. Anyone doubting this</div><div>claim has been subject to attack and depicted as a toady of the tobacco</div><div>lobby. The tobacco smoking issue also has become a favorite tool for</div><div>discrediting climate skeptics. A prime example is the book Merchants of Doubt,</div><div>by Naomi Oreskes and Eric Conway, which attacks several well-known senior</div><div>physicists, including the late Dr. Fred Seitz, a former president of the U.S.</div><div>National Academy of Sciences, the American Physical Society, and (most</div><div>recently) Rockefeller University. …</div><div>So what does this all mean? Wielding of the “tobacco weapon” regarding</div><div>global warming or other scientific issues bespeaks the desperation of those who</div><div>don’t have any valid scientific arguments and wish to avoid public debate. The</div><div>other issue is the conduct of science and the integrity of the science process.</div><div>The corruption of science in a worthy cause is still corruption, and it has led to</div><div>its further corruption in an unworthy cause—the ideologically driven claim of</div><div>anthropogenic global warming.’</div><div>Singer took money through AdTI to write about the EPA, Seitz took</div><div>tobacco money when at Rockefeller and Joe Bast defended Joe Camel.</div><div>Singer told the IRS Seitz was Chairman for 2 years after his death.</div><div>Singer was yet another organizer of the 2009 APS Petition.</div><div>Why would anyone believe anything Fred Singer said?</div><div>Z.2011.02-19 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Are you Somewhat Reasonable?</div><div>“Check out The Heartland Institute’s new blog, SomewhatReasonable.com</div><div>There you’ll find news, commentary, and analysis from Heartland staffers</div><div>and scholars on the latest in policy, politics, and culture. …</div><div>The Heartland Institute is a 27-year-old national nonprofit organization based in</div><div>Chicago. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote</div><div>free-market solutions to social and economic problems.”</div><div>982</div><div>
</div><div>982 From E&CN, one might gather that one of its missions is to create doubt about</div><div>science, make personal attacks on scientists and lobby elected officials.</div><div>Z.2011.03983</div><div>Z.2011.03-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Florida County Sues EPA Over Nutrient Restrictions</div><div>Z.2011.03-1a Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Groups Challenge Solar Power Project</div><div>Z.2011.03-4 James M. Taylor</div><div>Renewable Electricity Mandates Raise Prices, Kill Jobs</div><div>Z.2011.03-5 Paul Chesser984</div><div>Mont. Renewable Power Mandate Is Costly, Ineffective</div><div>Z.2011.03-6 James M. Taylor</div><div>EPA’s McCarthy Defiant About Global Warming Regs</div><div>Z.2011.03-6a James M. Taylor</div><div>U.S. Natural Gas Reserves Promise Affordable Energy Future, Official Say</div><div>Z.2011.03-7 Advertisement, quarter-page</div><div>NEW BOOK FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE</div><div>False Promise of Green Energy</div><div>CATO has been primarily funded by the Koch brothers, but has gotten</div><div>some ExxonMobil money.</div><div>985 CATO was also one of the largest think tank</div><div>recipients of tobacco money via Philip Morris (Fig. F.4).</div><div>Z.2011.03-8 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>EPA and Oklahoma Clash Over Regional Haze Plan986</div><div>
</div><div>983heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/29382.pdf</div><div>984 “Paul Chesser is executive director of the American Tradition Institute.</div><div>This article was first published on the American Tradition Institute Web site</div><div>(www.atinstitute.org )”</div><div>985 MAS2010 p.94.</div><div>986 www.sierraclub.org/coal/ok/OKHaze.aspx</div><div>www.therepublic.com/view/story/f4e435131ba143ab901b3c7cf4658213/OK--</div><div>Oklahoma-Haze-Ruling OK has much gas and there are legitimate</div><div>disagreements about strategies, but, scrubbers could have been added years ago.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>204</div><div>Z.2011.03-9 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>House Lawmakers Oppose Premature Fracking Rules</div><div>Z.2011.03-10 Maureen Martin</div><div>Schools Are Teaching Tree-Hugging 101</div><div>“Pumping out demagogues</div><div>Professionals and academics involved in real science on issues affecting the</div><div>environment are chemists, geologists, hydrogeologists, physicists,</div><div>astrophysicists, botanists, and zoologists, to name just a few. Many of these</div><div>scientists have advanced, highly specialized academic degrees. Without such</div><div>educational backgrounds, students who graduate from environmental</div><div>academies will be ill-equipped to devise ways to actually protect the</div><div>environment. Their futures will be limited to environmental demagoguery.”</div><div>Schools are normally distributed in competence, so I’m sure there are bad ones. I</div><div>agree with the words above … but must ask, why does Heartland then spend its</div><div>efforts using lawyers, political scientists, economists, freelance reporters, tobacco</div><div>advocates, fossil-energy professionals … to continually attack the sort of people</div><div>described above? Why does Martin then treat Monckton as a science expert?</div><div>Z.2011.03-11 Maureen Martin</div><div>Zoo School Teaches Activism, Disruption</div><div>“The School of Environmental Studies</div><div>(SES) at the Minneapolis Zoo is the environmental academy for juniors and</div><div>seniors in the public school district serving the greater Minneapolis-St. Paul area.</div><div>Unlike many environmental schools whose educational philosophy is</div><div>documented only vaguely, SES is extremely forthcoming about what it does and</div><div>does not teach. It does teach conservation and environmental activism; it does</div><div>not teach environmental science. …</div><div>Shouting Down Science Experts</div><div>The omission of science from the curriculum doesn’t stop some of the school’s</div><div>students from believing they are environmental science experts and acting on</div><div>their presumed knowledge. SES sent a delegation of students to the United</div><div>Nations Climate Conference (COP16) in Cancun last year, where they joined</div><div>other climate change alarmist youth groups in asking conference attendees to</div><div>restrict carbon dioxide emissions. They also engaged in chanting, singing,</div><div>dancing, and shouting down those who disagree with them.</div><div>For example, they confronted Lord Christopher Monckton, a prolific and</div><div>prominent global warming skeptic. …</div><div>According to the students, they shouted Monckton down …</div><div>That’s not how Monckton tells it. He remembers “the shrieking children” in the</div><div>350 group: “They had asked me why I doubted the ‘overwhelming consensus of</div><div>the world’s scientists,’ and I had been quietly explaining that science is not done</div><div>by consensus and never was ...987</div><div>Monckton recalls, adding, “they have much to learn about the uses and abuses of</div><div>rational argument, and still more to learn about the science and economics of</div><div>climate.”</div><div>Children are children and some of these may be impolite. Heartland seems to</div><div>think its ideas of science override those of mainstream science, and there have</div><div>been numerous examples in E&CN of trying to get those ideas to children.</div><div>Maureen Martin, J.D. has clearly portrayed Monckton as a “science</div><div>expert.” Given that, would the reader ascribe the slightest credibility to her</div><div>views? Would the reader expect anything objective?</div><div>Z.2011.03-11 Maureen Martin</div><div>Wis. School Teaches Only One Side of the Issue</div><div>“on, he said primarily the 2007 report of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental</div><div>Panel on Climate Change. The report is out of date and contradicted by</div><div>thousands of scientists around the world who point out influences on climate are</div><div>extremely complex, involving matters of soil chemistry, physics, oceanography,</div><div>and astrophysics, among others.”</div><div>Of course there is newer data, but “contradicted by thousands…”</div><div>is fantasy by someone who labels Monckton is a science expert.</div><div>
</div><div>987 Science is not done by consensus, but consensus emerges from data, as in</div><div>“smoking increases risk of disease.” Martin prefers to believe a nonscientist who</div><div>claims he is a member of the House of Lords, uses swastikas in speeches.</div><div>Whereas scientists generally seek truth, lawyers represent clients.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>205</div><div>Z.2011.03-13 Craig Idso, Keith Idso, Sherwood Idso</div><div>Scientists Oppose CO2 Legislation</div><div>“Craig Idso, Keith Idso, and Sherwood Idso drafted and submitted the following</div><div>letter to Congress in response to a letter recently submitted by 18 scientists</div><div>urging Congress to pass legislation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The</div><div>Idso’s are scientists988 who operate the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide</div><div>and Global Change. Thirty-five scientists signed this letter and another 36</div><div>scientists endorsed it. …Like the eighteen climate alarmists, we urge you to take</div><div>a fresh look at climate change. We believe you will find that it is not the</div><div>horrendous environmental threat they and others have made it out to be, and that</div><div>they have consistently exaggerated the negative effects of global warming on the</div><div>U.S. economy, national security, and public health, when such effects may well</div><div>be small to negligible.” IRS-3E</div><div>The signers form a selection from the usual lists, of (mostly) old men, few of</div><div>whom are climate scientists, much less credible ones, with often-misleading</div><div>affiliations. Most are found in [MAS2009, MAS2010].</div><div>
</div><div>988 See §K.</div><div>Z.2011.03-16 D. Brady Nelson</div><div>Halliburton Develops Eco-Friendly Fracking Fluid989</div><div>Z.2011.03-17 Jay Lehr</div><div>Green Fatigue Presents an Opening for Sound Science</div><div>“Green fatigue has created an opportunity for the proponents of freedom and</div><div>sound science to spread the truth to the very people who have long been targeted</div><div>by environmental extremists.” IRS-3E</div><div>“In much the same way as global warming fatigue has caught up with a majority</div><div>of the American public and keeps alarmists in line, green fatigue is a good</div><div>thing.”</div><div>
</div><div>989 If true, this is probably good.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>206</div><div>Z.2011.04990</div><div>Z.2011.04-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>Radiation Levels Still Safe in Japan</div><div>‘“This is precisely what happened at Three mile Island [right]. There was a core</div><div>meltdown, yet virtually no radiation was released outside of the site.</div><div>There were no casualties and no harmful health effects to others.”</div><div>Rusty Towell, Nuclear Physicist, Professor of Physics, Abilene Christian U’</div><div>Actually, Towell991 may have minimized the issue a bit.992</div><div> Even if no one is</div><div>harmed by radiation, that will be very expensive.</div><div>Z.2011.04-2 Heartland ad, full-page ~ Z.2007.07-12</div><div>A Penny for Your Thoughts On CO2</div><div>Z.2011.04-4a Advertisement, quarter-page</div><div>SPPI has published a new Book,</div><div>The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment</div><div>“Global warming alarmists tell us the horrors of increasing atmospheric CO2</div><div>concentration. Skeptics tell us that it’s not all that bad. Finally, there is a</div><div>nonapologetic treatise that tells us of the benefits of atmospheric CO2</div><div>enrichment in an alphabetical format. This extensively referenced 360-page color</div><div>book by Drs. Craig Idso and Sherwood Idso tells us of fifty-five benefits of</div><div>atmospheric CO2 enrichment, and belongs in the library of all who study CO2</div><div>and climate.” Meme-120</div><div>SPPI is ~ Robert Ferguson, §K. Howard Hayden runs Vales Lake.993</div><div>Z.2011.04-7 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>House Prepares to Fight EPA Overreach</div><div>Z.2011.04-10 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Connecticut Considers Wind Power Moratorium994</div><div>
</div><div>990heartland.org/sites/default/files/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/fil</div><div>es/pdfs/29621.pdf</div><div>991 MAS2009 p.126. He signed APS Petition, connection then unknown.</div><div>992 abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/japan-releases-40-year-nuke-plantcleanup-plan-15202758#.TvQXYfJLp8E</div><div>993 www.valeslake.com/bookmart.htm See also MAS2009 and MAS2011f.</div><div>994 www.hartfordbusiness.com/news18788.html</div><div>www.rep-am.com/articles/2011/06/10/news/local/563696.txt</div><div>Not all sites are good for wind, but these were approved within a few months.</div><div>Z.2011.04-11 Pamela Gorman995</div><div>Wis. May Seek Larger Setbacks for Wind Turbines</div><div>“Dr. Nina Pierpont996 has studied the negative health impacts, which she refers</div><div>to as “Wind Turbine Syndrome.” The symptoms, according to Pierpont, include</div><div>headaches, nosebleeds, ringing in the ears, blurred vision, memory problems,</div><div>panic episodes, vertigo, and profound loss of sleep.”</div><div>Z.2011.04-11a Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Renewable Fuels Kill Jobs, According to Recent British Study</div><div>“The United Kingdom’s government mandated use of renewable energy has</div><div>destroyed 3.7 jobs for every job created, new research shows.</div><div>Fewer jobs, Higher costs</div><div>In “Worth the Candle?” Verso Economics, a U.K.-based economics consulting</div><div>company,997 found renewable power not only kills jobs but also raises</div><div>consumers’ energy costs.</div><div>Z.2011.04-12 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Suit Against EPA over Mining Guidance Goes Ahead</div><div>Z.2011.04-12a Heartland half-page ad</div><div>Everything you need to know about environment and climate policy</div><div>Heartland sends this to all legislators and claims that 57% of them read it.</div><div>
</div><div>995 “Pamela Gorman is a former Arizona state senator.”</div><div>996 www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/1805150/industry-slams-reports-windturbine-syndrome</div><div>; www.windturbinesyndrome.com/book.html</div><div>iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/3/035103/pdf/1748-9326_6_3_035103.pdf</div><div>www.mass.gov/dep/energy/wind/impactstudy.htm Mass. Gets 164p study from</div><div>real experts, which finds little/no evidence for many (not all) complaints, gives</div><div>good recommendation for science-based public policy, not “windmills are</div><div>perfect” or “windmills are disaster.” E&CN emphasizes bad effects of wind</div><div>turbines, minimizes bad effects of coal plants.</div><div>thinkprogress.org/romm/issue/?mobile=nc brief summary of results</div><div>997 Verso Economics seems to be a ~2-person consultancy (Richard Marsh and</div><div>Tom Miers) formed about 2 years ago, although a bio is only given for Marsh.</div><div>www.versoeconomics.com</div><div>www.blog.foe-scotland.org.uk/index.php/2011/05/why-the-doubters-are-wrongabout-green-jobs-in-scotland</div><div>This is FoE, but they do raise issues.</div><div>www.actionforrenewables.org/blog/archive/201103/employing-truth</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>207</div><div>Z.2011.04-13 Craig D. Idso998</div><div>Arctic Study Finds No Recent Warming (Warning: technical)</div><div>“Climate alarmists contend the Earth’s near-surface air temperatures of the past</div><div>decade were unprecedentedly high relative to the warmth of the entire past</div><div>millennium, due primarily to human carbon dioxide emissions.</div><div> They also claim this warming has been most strongly expressed throughout the</div><div>Arctic, which they often describe as the “canary in a coal mine” for the planet as</div><div>a whole.</div><div> Working with an ice core retrieved from the Akademii Nauk (AN) ice cap</div><div>(_80°31’N, 94°49’E) of the Severnaya Zemlya archipelago, which is located in</div><div>the central Russian Arctic between the Kara and Laptev Seas, scientists used</div><div>oxygen isotopes to reconstruct temperatures covering the period 1883 to 1998.</div><div> After confirming “good correlations and similarities” between their oxygen</div><div>isotope data and 15 temperature stations distributed throughout the Atlantic and</div><div>Eurasian sub-Arctic, the scientists reported the oxygen isotope data</div><div>“show pronounced 20th-century temperature changes, with a strong rise about</div><div>1920 and the absolute temperature maximum in the 1930s.”</div><div>Accordingly, the data show there was no net warming of the Atlantic and</div><div>Eurasian sub-Arctic over the last 80 years of the twentieth century.</div><div> The findings, published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Glaciology, cast doubt</div><div>on alarmist assertions of alarming recent global temperature rise given the Arctic</div><div>is expected to be the first place on the planet to exhibit anthropogenic induced</div><div>global warming and is expected to exhibit that warming more strongly than other</div><div>regions of the globe. The study is available online at</div><div>www.igsoc.org/journal/55/189/j08j062.pdf ”</div><div>Additional Reference</div><div>Ladd, M.J. and Gajewski, K. 2010. The North American summer Arctic front</div><div>during 1948-2007. International Journal of Climatology 30: 874-883</div><div>Idso has sometimes done scientific research, but this is anti-science. It</div><div>discusses ice, but is really a “snow job” for the E&CN readership unlikely</div><div>to catch problems. It shows fine examples of common tactics. E&CN has</div><div>long targeted “state and national elected officials” and “municipal</div><div>officials”, who get it free and are the only ones to do so.</div><div>This has clear messages, emboldened above. In real scholarship, people</div><div>give clear citations so that assertions can be checked.</div><div>How could a typical reader check these? Idso gives a URL:</div><div>www.igsoc.org/journal/55/189/j08j062.pdf</div><div>
</div><div>998 “Craig D. Idso, Ph.D is lead author of Climate Change Reconsidered, published</div><div>by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). An</div><div>earlier version of this article appeared on the NIPCC Web site. …”</div><div>Unfortunately, that redirects to an International Glaciological Society page</div><div>that requests the reader’s IGS login and password, which few would have.</div><div>Obvious searches at www.nipccreport.org for “Arctic Study” or “Akaemii”</div><div>or “Severnaya” fail to find the article. If the reader searches</div><div>“Chronological Archive” backwards to March 2011, Idso’s article999</div><div>actually gives a precise citation.</div><div>1000 Although the original paper itself is</div><div>paywalled, its abstract is freely available: 1001</div><div>“From 1999 to 2001 a 724 m deep ice core was drilled on Akademii Nauk ice</div><div>cap, Severnaya Zemlya, to gain high-resolution proxy data from the central</div><div>Russian Arctic. Despite strong summertime meltwater percolation, this ice core</div><div>provides valuable information on the regional climate and environmental history.</div><div>We present data of stable water isotopes, melt-layer content and major ions from</div><div>the uppermost 57 m of this core, covering the period 1883-1998. Dating was</div><div>achieved by counting seasonal isotopic cycles and using reference horizons.</div><div>Multi-annual d18O values reflect Eurasian sub-Arctic and Arctic surface airtemperature</div><div>variations. We found strong correlations to instrumental temperature</div><div>data from some stations (e.g. r = 0.62 for Vardø, northern Norway). The d18O</div><div>values show pronounced 20th-century temperature changes, with a strong rise</div><div>about 1920 and the absolute temperature maximum in the 1930s. A recent</div><div>decrease in the deuterium-excess time series indicates an increasing role of the</div><div>Kara Sea as a regional moisture source. From the multi-annual ion variations we</div><div>deduced decreasing sea-salt aerosol trends in the 20th century, as reflected by</div><div>sodium and chloride, whereas sulphate and nitrate are strongly affected by</div><div>anthropogenic pollution.“</div><div>Partial-quoting an abstract without reading the paper is a common tactic,</div><div>but Idso’s article did include a few details found only in the actual paper.</div><div>Idso (properly) quotes material from the abstract, and a casual reader might</div><div>easily think the “ Accordingly…” sentence paraphrased the actual paper,</div><div>but Opel, et al did not write that. Combining a quote with a paraphrase is</div><div>another common tactic. Idso’s article interprets the paper in a way</div><div>guaranteed to mislead its audience.</div><div>
</div><div>999 www.nipccreport.org/articles/2011/mar/8mar2011a1.html</div><div>1000 Opel, T., Fritzsche, D., Meyer, H., Schutt, R., Weiler, K., Ruth, U., Wilhelms,</div><div>F. and Fischer, H. 2009. 115 year ice-core data from Akademii Nauk ice cap,</div><div>Severnaya Zemlya: high-resolution record of Eurasian Arctic climate change.</div><div>Journal of Glaciology 55: 21-31.</div><div>1001www.ingentaconnect.com/content/igsoc/jog/2009/00000055/00000189/art0000</div><div>3 One cannot blame Idso for the paywall. Can one blame him for picking an</div><div>obscure paper and feeding his interpretation of it to elected officials? </div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>208</div><div>Idso also shows a graph from Opel, et al, with comment:</div><div>“It is indeed strange that the portion of the earth that is supposed to (1) be the</div><div>first place on the planet to exhibit anthropogenic-induced global warming, and to</div><div>(2) exhibit that warming most strongly, shows no net warming whatsoever over</div><div>the last eight decades of the 20th century.”</div><div>That is a fine example of multiple cherry-picking:</div><div>? This paper covered 1883 to 1998; Idso’s statement reflects 1920 to</div><div>1998, and the real (2009) paper says “a warming trend since 1990.”</div><div>? The graph invites the reader to think “it was high in 1920 and 1940, so</div><div>this must just be natural fluctuation,” akin to the constant wish to make</div><div>current global warming irrelevant by promoting the Medieval Warm</div><div>Period. The flaw will be demonstrated shortly.</div><div>? The Arctic is well-known to be subject to oscillations of various sorts,</div><div>1002 like the El Nino effects discussed in §Y.1, but decadal.</div><div>? “Polar amplification” makes some areas of the Arctic more sensitive</div><div>than other areas of the globe.</div><div>? No one place is guaranteed to represent the entire Arctic. This</div><div>particular place has some unusual characteristics unmentioned by Idso,</div><div>such as large nearby mines, whose high-sulfur emissions were visible</div><div>there and may have cooled the area for a few decades.</div><div>1003</div><div>The actual paper (or good approximation) is freely available elsewhere.1004</div><div>
</div><div>1002 www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch11s11-8-1.html</div><div>“Natural multi-decadal variability has been suggested as partly responsible for the</div><div>large warming in the 1920s to 1940s (Bengtsson et al., 2004; Johannessen et al.,</div><div>2004) followed by cooling until the 1960s.”</div><div>1003 epic.awi.de/9893/1/Wei2003d.pdf</div><div>1004 epic.awi.de/18879/1/Ope2008c.pdf Emissions fell with economy.</div><div>epic.awi.de/9893/1/Wei2003d.pdf</div><div>Z.2011.04-16 Heartland advertisement one and a half pages</div><div>COMMON-SENSE ENVIRONMENT ADVOCATES DIRECTORY</div><div>Many are found in [MAS2010, pp.93-95], emboldened and charities.</div><div>1005</div><div>Alabama Policy Institute</div><div>Alaska Policy Forum</div><div>ACSH -American Council on Science and Health</div><div>AEI American Enterprise Institute</div><div>American Land Rights Association</div><div>ALEC – American Legislative Exchange Council</div><div>AFP -Americans for Prosperity</div><div>ATR – Americans for Tax Reform</div><div>Arkansas Policy Foundation</div><div>The Beacon Hill Institute</div><div>Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions</div><div>Bluegrass Institute for Public Policy Solutions</div><div>Cascade Policy Institute</div><div>CATO - Cato Institute</div><div>Citizens Alliance for Responsible Energy</div><div>Empire Center for New York State Policy</div><div>Ethan Allen Institute</div><div>Freedom Foundation (Formerly Evergreen FF)</div><div>Galen Institute</div><div>Georgia Public Policy Foundation</div><div>Goldwater Institute</div><div>Grassroot Institute of Hawaii</div><div>The Heartland Institute</div><div>The Heritage Foundation</div><div>TII – The Independent Institute</div><div>Idaho Freedom Foundation</div><div>Illinois Policy Institute</div><div>Independence Institute</div><div>James Madison Institute</div><div>John Locke Foundation</div><div>John Bartlett Center for Public Policy</div><div>Kansas Policy Institute</div><div>
</div><div>1005 Some of the regular-font organizations are familiar as well, just not listed in</div><div>MAS2010. §0.4 includes many of these, with key funders.</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>209</div><div>MacIver Institute</div><div>Mackinac Center for Public Policy</div><div>The Maine Heritage Policy Center</div><div>Manhattan Institute for Policy Research</div><div>Maryland Public Policy Institute</div><div>Mercatus Center at George Mason University</div><div>PERC – Property and Environment Research Center</div><div>Public Interest Institute</div><div>Reason Foundation</div><div>Rio Grande Foundation</div><div>SPPI -Science and Public Policy Institute [really CSCDGC]</div><div>Show-Me Institute</div><div>South Carolina Policy Council</div><div>Sutherland Institute</div><div>Tennessee Center for Policy Research</div><div>Texas Citizen Action Network</div><div>Texas Public Policy Foundation</div><div>Thomas Jefferson Institute</div><div>Virginia Institute for Public Policy</div><div>Washington Legal Foundation</div><div>Washington Policy Center</div><div>Wisconsin Policy Research Institute</div><div>Wyoming Liberty Group</div><div>Z.2011.04-17 Review by Jay Lehr</div><div>Rising CO2 Benefits Plant Life</div><div>The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment</div><div>By Craig D. Idso and Sherwood B. Idso Vales Lake Publishing.</div><div>1006</div><div>“The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has declared carbon dioxide (CO2)</div><div>a dangerous air pollutant, but just the opposite is actually the case.</div><div> Not only are increasing concentrations of atmospheric CO2 not dangerous to</div><div>human, animal, or plant health, they actually benefit Earth’s many life forms,</div><div>counteracting the deleterious effects of real air pollutants. …1007</div><div> Atmospheric carbon dioxide is the elixir of life.</div><div> Nowadays, all we ever hear about atmospheric CO2 is the alleged negative</div><div>consequences of its increasing concentrations. These distortions of the truth—in</div><div>fact, reversals of it—are spread by governments and environmental advocacy</div><div>groups who believe in using fear to gain ever-increasing influence over other</div><div>people’s lives. …</div><div> Craig and Sherwood Idso are among the world’s most tireless, honest, and</div><div>ethical scientists.1008 They are providing a tremendous service in working to</div><div>thoughtfully counter the insanity of our global warming delusion and the</div><div>absurdity of the depiction of CO2 as a harmful gas.</div><div> You can read this book from cover to cover or pick and choose which topics to</div><div>read first, through its comprehensive index. Get a copy of this book and share it</div><div>with your friends.”</div><div>Increased CO2 has benefits, under certain circumstances, and if it were not</div><div>a greenhouse gas, those would be fine. The Idso’s tend to ignore the moreserious</div><div>downsides of increased heat. Farmkids who learn Liebig’s Law1009</div><div>by age 10 understand the error, but it sounds good to the general public.</div><div>Despite CO2 increases, corn is not grown in the Sahara. Meme-120</div><div>Z.2011.04-18 Jay Lehr</div><div>State-Based Environmental Programs: Why They’re a Better Way than the</div><div>EPA</div><div>“Since then, however, EPA has become a wholly owned subsidiary of</div><div>environmental advocacy groups and serves primarily as an obstacle course for</div><div>economic growth. Moreover, the need for a federal EPA no longer exists. It is</div><div>time to return power to the states. …</div><div>Congress is looking to make changes. This is a good place to start.”</div><div>
</div><div>1006 Vales Lake is ~Howard Hayden.</div><div>1007 E&CN continually downplays pollution, but here, CO2 protects plants from it.</div><div>1008 They are tireless. As for the others, there is room for doubt, Z.2011.04-13.</div><div>1009 /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebig%27s_law_of_the_minimum</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>210</div><div>Z.2011.091010</div><div>Z.2011.09-1 James M. Taylor</div><div>NASA Data Show Carbon Dioxide Trapping Less Heat than Expected</div><div>Actually, not. This was an erroneous paper by Roy Spencer and Danny</div><div>Braswell that slipped through weak peer review in a journal unfamiliar</div><div>with them. By now, Spencer has a long history of errors that usually</div><div>yielded results casting doubt on the mainstream.</div><div>This paper was so obviously poor that the Editor-in-Chief ended up</div><div>resigning, quite publicly, to take responsibility.</div><div>1011</div><div> Gavin Schmidt</div><div>wrote:1012</div><div>“The primary question of course is why an editor would resign over a published</div><div>paper. Wagner (who I have never met or communicated with) explains it well in</div><div>his letter:</div><div>After having become aware of the situation, and studying the various pro and</div><div>contra arguments, I agree with the critics of the paper. Therefore, I would like to</div><div>take the responsibility for this editorial decision and, as a result, step down as</div><div>Editor-in-Chief of the journal Remote Sensing.</div><div>…</div><div>With this step I would also like to personally protest against how the authors and</div><div>like-minded climate sceptics have much exaggerated the paper’s conclusions in</div><div>public statements. [UAH press release. Forbes article etc.]</div><div>He clearly feels as though he, and his fledgling journal, were played in order to</div><div>get a politicized message to the media. A more seasoned editor might well have</div><div>acted differently at the various stages and so he resigned to take responsibility</div><div>for the consequences of not doing a better job, and, presumably, to try and</div><div>staunch the impression that Remote Sensing is a journal where you can get</div><div>anything published.”</div><div>
</div><div>1010 heartland.org/sites/default/files/newspaperissues/pdfs/September%2011%20ECN%20web.pdf</div><div>1011en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_%28scientist%29. 2011</div><div>bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/09/02/remote-sensing-editor-resigns-overspencerbraswell-paper</div><div>climatecrocks.com/2011/09/03/spencer-braswell-this-is-not-new-this-is-the-wayits-done</div><div>
</div><div>1012 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/09/resignations-retractions-andthe-process-of-science</div><div>Z.2011.09-2 Heartland full-page advertisement</div><div>Hit Replay – 6</div><div>th ICCC</div><div>With six sessions, two keynote speakers, and a keynote “warmist” vs. “skeptic”</div><div>debate, there’s a lot of solid information as the conference “restores the scientific</div><div>method” to its rightful place in the debate over climate change.</div><div>Highlighted speakers:</div><div>David Tuerck, Ph.D, Economics Professor</div><div>Robert Mendelsohn, PhD. Economics Professor</div><div>Nicola Scafetta, PhD. Scientist</div><div>S. Fred Singer, PhD. Physicist</div><div>Robert M. Carter, Hon. FRSNZ, Marine Geologist</div><div>Craig D. Idso, Ph.D, Scientist/Author</div><div>Z.2011.09-3 Alyssa Carducci</div><div>Corbett Holds Ground Against Shale Gas Taxes</div><div>Z.2011.09-5 Kenneth Artz</div><div>N.D. Economy Booming Thanks to Oil Production</div><div>Z.2011.09-5a Quarter-page advertisement</div><div>POWER FOR USA</div><div>Z.2011.09-7 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Fraud Rampant in Obama Weatherization Program</div><div>Z.2011.09-8 D. Brady Nelson</div><div>House Committee Moves to Block EPA Regulation</div><div>“We are trying to stop nothing short of the brazen EPA attempt to override</div><div>congressional fuel mileage standards oversight and impose a radical leftist</div><div>agenda. John Carter U.S. Representative - TX”</div><div>Z.2011.09-14 D. Brady Nelson</div><div>Calif. Golden Eagles Threatened by Wind Turbines</div><div>Z.2011.09-17 Joseph L. Bast</div><div>Heartland Replies to Nature</div><div>“Nature, it seems to this nonscientist observer, has lost its way. Until the journal</div><div>opens its eyes, it will not be a serious voice on climate science.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>211</div><div>Z.2011.101013</div><div>Z.2011.10-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Landmark Experiment Supports Cosmic Ray Warming Theory</div><div>Would the typical government official understand what was done and what</div><div>it did or did not mean? This was interesting, but hardly earthshaking.1014</div><div>
</div><div>It falls under the “anything but CO2” category. Meme-14</div><div>Z.2011.10-14 Heartland full-page advertisement ~Z.2011.09-2</div><div>Global Warming Causes UFO Attacks?</div><div>The Guardian extracted a few sentences from a 33-page paper to create an</div><div>amusing story, which Heartland and others tried to spin as a big deal. Read</div><div>the real paper.</div><div>1015</div><div>
</div><div>1013 heartland.org/sites/default/files/newspaperissues/pdfs/October%2011%20ECN%20web.pdf</div><div>
</div><div>1014 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/08/the-cerncloud-results-aresurprisingly-interesting/</div><div>1015 www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/aug/18/aliens-destroy-humanity-protectcivilisations</div><div>is the story, the real paper is:</div><div>arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1104/1104.4462.pdf</div><div>Z.2011.10-16 Jim Lakely1016</div><div> (really, half-page advertisement)</div><div>New Global Warming Report Contradicts UN’s IPCC IRS-0E</div><div>“The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),</div><div>already under severe criticism for violating the requirements of academic peer</div><div>review and relying on secondary sources, comes under question again in a new</div><div>report coproduced by three nonprofit research organizations.</div><div> Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report states “natural causes are</div><div>very likely to be [the] dominant” cause of climate change that took place in the</div><div>twentieth and the start of the twentyfirst centuries.</div><div> “We are not saying anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) cannot produce</div><div>some warming or have not in the past. Our conclusion is that the evidence</div><div>shows they are not playing a substantial role,” the study says. Meme-36</div><div> The report goes on to state, “the net effect of continued warming and rising</div><div>carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere is most likely to be beneficial to</div><div>humans, plants, and wildlife.” Meme-120</div><div> Both conclusions contradict the widely cited reports of the IPCC. …</div><div>Key findings, as outlined in the interim report’s executive summary, include:</div><div>• “Rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 concentrations, by increasing crop</div><div>yields, will play a major role in averting hunger and ecological destruction in the</div><div>future.” Meme-120</div><div>• “Global warming is more likely to improve rather than harm human health</div><div>because rising temperatures lead to a greater reduction in winter deaths than the</div><div>increase they cause in summer deaths.”</div><div>• “Even in worst-case scenarios, mankind will be much better off in the year</div><div>2100 than it is today, and therefore able to adapt to whatever challenges climate</div><div>change presents.”</div><div>• “We find evidence that the models [relied on by the IPCC] over-estimate the</div><div>amount of warming that occurred during the twentieth century and fail to</div><div>incorporate chemical and biological processes that may be as important as the</div><div>physical processes employed in the models.” Meme-05</div><div>• “[T]he Medieval Warm Period of approximately 1,000 years ago, when there</div><div>was about 28 percent less CO2 in the atmosphere than there is currently, was</div><div>both global and warmer than today’s world.” Meme-56</div><div>This is classic anti-science created for a non-expert audience, §E.</div><div>Few will ever read this, but it is a useful prop for those who wish to</div><div>believe.</div><div>
</div><div>1016 “Jim Lakely (…) is communications director for The Heartland Institute.”</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>212</div><div>Z.2011.111017</div><div>Z.2011.11-1 H. Sterling Burnett</div><div>Kansas and Texas Lead States Challenging EPA Cross-State Rule</div><div>Z.2011.11-3 Kenneth Artz</div><div>Texas Wind Power Lines Bust Budget</div><div>Z.2011.11-12 James M. Taylor see Z.2011.10-5</div><div>Cosmic Ray Warming Theory Gains Scientific Traction Meme-14</div><div>‘The CERN experiment provides yet another example of alarmists jumping the</div><div>gun regarding global warming,” said Jay Lehr, science director for The</div><div>Heartland Institute, which publishes Environment & Climate News. “It is foolish</div><div>and unscientific for alarmists to claim that human-emitted carbon dioxide is the</div><div>sole or primary cause of our recent moderate warming when we still have so</div><div>much to learn about global climate and the weight of scientific evidence points</div><div>to natural climate variability.”</div><div>I know many real climate scientists, none of whom think CO2 is the only</div><div>cause of warming. The IPCC certainly does not say that either.</div><div>Z.2011.11-13 Thomas Tanton</div><div>EPA Misrepresents Benefits of Ozone Restrictions</div><div>Z.2011.11-19 Americans for Prosperity full-page advertisement</div><div>2011 defending the american dream summit</div><div>
</div><div>1017 heartland.org/sites/default/files/newspaperissues/pdfs/November%2011%20ECN%20web.pdf</div><div>
</div><div>Z.2012 1 Issue.</div><div>Z.2012.011018</div><div>Z.2012.01-1 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Alaskans Set to Pocket Hefty Oil Dividend</div><div>Z.2012.01-1 Quarter-page advertisement</div><div>EMPIRICAL DETERMINATION OF CLIMATE SENSITIVITY</div><div>“By an astonishing 15 distinct methods, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley</div><div>demonstrates in his latest SPPI technical paper that the warming we can expect</div><div>in response to the doubling of CO2 concentration that is expected this century</div><div>will not be 6°F, the IPCC’s central estimate, but only around 2°F.”</div><div>This presents Monckton as a credible expert.</div><div>Z.2012.01-5 James M. Taylor</div><div>Nova’s Chart Shows Climate Alarmism Funding IRS-3E</div><div>‘Funding for global warming alarmists dwarfs the much-publicized funding for</div><div>climate crisis skeptics, science writer Joanne Nova explains in a global warming</div><div>funding chart and accompanying text on her Web site, JoanneNova.com.au.</div><div> Vested interests support alarmists</div><div> “The money and vested interests on the pro-scare side is vastly larger, more</div><div>influential, and more powerful than that on the skeptical side,” Nova writes.</div><div> “Fossil fuel and conservative think-tanks are competing against most of the</div><div>world financial houses, the nuclear and renewable energy industry, large wellfinanced</div><div>green activists (WWF revenue was $700m last year), not to mention</div><div>whole government departments, major political parties, universities dependent</div><div>on government funding, the BBC (there is no debate), the EU, and the entire</div><div>UN,” she explained.. …</div><div>Nova’s chart is reprinted here and can be found with additional commentary at</div><div>joannenova.com.au/2011/10/map-the-climate-change-scare-machine-theperpetual-self-feeding-cycle-of-alarm/</div><div>”</div><div>It also claims “Produced by a self-taught, unfunded scientist.” Although</div><div>she spent some years as a science presenter, she is not a scientist, does not</div><div>produce credible peer-reviewed research.</div><div>It is very likely she has gotten funds from Heartland, §H.5.</div><div>
</div><div>1018 heartland.org/sites/default/files/newspaperissues/pdfs/January%2012%20ECN%20web.pdf</div><div>
</div><div>Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax John R. Mashey 02/14/12</div><div>213</div><div>Z.2012.01-6 Half-page advertisement</div><div>A Better Way to Teach Politics</div><div>Z.2012.01-7 Cartoon</div><div>Why should we trust the media on “global warming?”</div><div>Z.2012.01-8 Cheryl K. Chumley</div><div>Kentucky’s Leading Democrat Takes on Obama’s EPA</div><div>Although rare, good words are occasionally said of a Democrat.</div><div>Kentucky, of course, is an Appalachian coal state.</div><div>Z.2012.01-9 Kenneth Artz</div><div>California Imposes Unprecedented Chemical Curbs</div><div>Z.2012.01-10 Bonner R. Cohen</div><div>Solyndra Scandal Widens, Chu Pressured to Resign</div><div>Z.2012.01-15 D. Brady Nelson</div><div>Global Warming Not a National Security Threat</div><div>“Global warming is unlikely to hurt U.S. national security, but expensive</div><div>programs implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will weaken the</div><div>nation’s economy and military, concludes a new study published by the George</div><div>C. Marshall Institute.</div><div>CEO William O’Keefe (past ExxonMobil lobbyist, 25-year API veteran</div><div>says so). Australian Jo Nova, once a science presenter, agrees with him,</div><div>as does CEI’s Chris Horner. Free-lance economist Nelson says so.</div><div>On the other hand, the US military rather strongly thinks otherwise.1019</div><div>
</div><div>1019 www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/may/20/climate-changeclimate-change-scepticism</div><div>
</div><div>Z.2012.01-16 Jay Lehr</div><div>America’s Energy Future Is Bright If government doesn’t shut it down</div><div>“First, there is no scientific evidence that the use of fossil fuels in our country</div><div>has a negative effect on our climate. Our efforts to reduce carbon dioxide</div><div>emissions are foolish. A simple volcanic eruption will cancel a decade of effort</div><div>in this regard.1020 Meme-54</div><div>Second, the laws of physics make it impossible to harvest the Earth’s winds or</div><div>the sun’s rays in an economic manner.</div><div>Third, the United States is uniquely blessed with abundant energy resources—</div><div>soon to be number one in oil resources and already number one in natural gas</div><div>and coal resources. North America collectively dwarfs the rest of the world in</div><div>energy resources.”</div><div>1021</div><div>Any readers who actually made it this far are due congratulations for</div><div>wading through this! If anyone has an appetite for more, they might read</div><div>some actual E&CN issues.</div><div>
</div><div>1020 This is false and misleading.. Yearly human emissions outweigh yearly</div><div>volcanoes by ~100X. Even non-experts know this. For example, the Keeling</div><div>Curve shows little sign of volcanoes, does it? Where is Pinatubo?</div><div>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeling_Curve</div><div>1021 Renewable energy – never, fossil fuels forever. Unlike Lehr, I live in Silicon</div><div>Valley and can interact with top solar researchers, so I often hear about R&D</div><div>progress, and I did work at Bell Labs for 10 years. Like anyone involved with</div><div>semiconductors, I find volume/cost learning curves familiar.</div></div><div>==</div>

Hack Mashey doc

Attachments