Liveblogging the Heartland Institute's Global Warming Denier Conference
I’m in New York City today for an event called "The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change." It’s sponsored by the Heartland Institute, one of the leading oil industry-funded deniers of global warming. According to ExxonSecrets.org, Heartland received $561,500 (unadjusted for inflation) from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005.
I know what you’re thinking – what better way to start the week than by hanging out at a meeting of global warming deniers? But conservative media outlets like the Wall Street Journal and National Review are doing everything they can to paint a false picture of the event.
They don’t want you to see it for what it is - a gathering of people who may have some science in their backgrounds but have long since sold their soul to the energy industry.
Someone has to be there to see what’s really happening at this event. I joked with my friends that I was going in like Cartman going into San Francisco on South Park – full atmospheric dive suit.
I’m not going to waste time here rebutting every line of global warming denial I hear this week. Trying to win a scientific debate with a global warming denier is like trying to blow out one of those re-lighting birthday candles – it’s a waste of breath.
But I will keep an eye on whether the speakers are being truthful on their resumes. Already, The News Journal of Wilmington, DE has reported David Legates has exaggerated his credentials. Why haven’t his state employers or local environmentalists made a big deal of it? Says Chad Tolman of the Sierra Club’s Delaware chapter, "I don't know if the governor or anyone else cares about it enough at this point to press the issue." Ouch. Much like the climate denial industry in general, looks like Legates has dropped from controversial to irrelevant.
As the event goes on, I’ll also dive into some topics that aren't on the conference agenda:
- Global warming isn’t a theory to be debated, temperatures are warming already and impacting species from moose in Minnesota to brook trout in Pennsylvania
- Congress isn’t debating warming, it’s taking on climate solutions, including top Republican Senators like Virginia's John Warner, North Carolina's Elizabeth Dole, and Minnesota's Norm Coleman
- Where did the money for this lavish event come from? Who paid for the speakers’ travel expenses and honorariums?
Much more to come over the next two days. You can also read more from Kevin Grandia at DeSmogBlog, one of the few true greens allowed to register for the event.
Hello,
I sent the below comment to DeSmogBlog, I believe it is appropriate to send to you, too.
>>
Greetings,
I've read your first post above, and you appear to be using the tactic of delegitimizing the presenters, rather than addressing their forthcoming arguments, as a means to debunk them.
How is it you find this to be a necessary, or effective, tactic? As the conference will be releasing transcripts and its topics of discussion, you should instead be focused on addressing the coming information.
Statistics and studies are independently verifiable -- how about taking the role of peer reviewer? I would be happy to discuss the conference releases with you,
starting with this one:
http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC-Feb%2020.pdf
Best,
David
Posted by: The Posthumous Luger | March 03, 2008 at 12:49 PM
Don't worry, we'll tackle the NIPCC report (conveniently named to sound like the UN's IPCC report) in a later post!
Posted by: NWF Blogger | March 03, 2008 at 01:51 PM
I am here too, blogging for Greenpeace ExxonSecrets...feel like a skunk in the garden party. I've nicknamed this Denial-a-palooza 2008...
The most important question is WHERE IS EXXON? 2 or 3 years ago Exxon would have delivered the keynote address here and a number of other corporations would have been proud sponsors. Now Heartland is distancing themselves from corporate funding. (WHO THE HECK IS PAYING FOR THESE $280/NIGHT ROOMS THEN?)
To update your figures, we know about $7.5 Million in Exxon funding to the co-sponsors of this gig (98-06) including over $780K in 2006. I built a map of the attendees and sponsoring orgs here http://www.exxonsecrets.org/index.php?mapid=1178
and blog here
www.exxonsecrets.org
Posted by: Kert Davies | March 03, 2008 at 03:14 PM
I am here too, blogging for Greenpeace ExxonSecrets...feel like a skunk in the garden party. I've nicknamed this Denial-a-palooza 2008...
The most important question is WHERE IS EXXON? 2 or 3 years ago Exxon would have delivered the keynote address here and a number of other corporations would have been proud sponsors. Now Heartland is distancing themselves from corporate funding. (WHO THE HECK IS PAYING FOR THESE $280/NIGHT ROOMS THEN?)
To update your figures, we know about $7.5 Million in Exxon funding to the co-sponsors of this gig (98-06) including over $780K in 2006. I built a map of the attendees and sponsoring orgs here http://www.exxonsecrets.org/index.php?mapid=1178
and blog here
www.exxonsecrets.org
Posted by: Kert Davies | March 03, 2008 at 03:14 PM
First of all let me be clear, I don't question the fact that the climate changes and that it has changed recently and that it will most likely continue to change in the future.
I do question the "man-made" tag line that has been attached to many scientific or unscientific claims about the causes of climate change (or what was formerly called "global warming" until evidence of a new global cooling period began surfacing).
Even the founder of Greenpeace admits there's no proof that global warming is cause by humans.
What is the real agenda behind those who push "man made" global warming? I'm not referring to those of the "earth cult" who simply refuse to look at the whole issue--those who will place blind faith in gl profiteers like Al Gore but refuse to consider the problematic scientific realities such as global warming cycles on other planets, the reality of recurring solar cycles affecting our own planet throughout history, the minimal effect that man-made carbon emissions have on the planet's climate, and the hypocrisy/scam inherent in many of the "clean fuels" offered to us such as biofuels that are destroying rain forests and elminating food crops while offering little (if any) environmental benefit.
At the top, the real agenda ultimately rests in population control/extermination (since we all exhale carbon dioxide apparently we're all enemies to the planet right?), carbon taxes--allowing the elite in government to give more of our money to themselves to their friends in power through "bailout" schemes, and ultimately increased power grabs and tyranny through world government and purchasing/energy controls.
We know that there is big money behind the propaganda effort to add the label "man-made" to any discussions of global warming. But where is the money coming from? Quite possibly its the same shady global "think tanks" like the CFR, Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission, etc. who decided long ago that they'd exploit the natural phenomenon of global warming and use it to grab more power and set up world government".
I'm not going to say that Exxon hasn't invested money in the debate-- I'm well aware that corporations are first and foremost self-serving. But if you're really interested in following the money trail then I suggest taking a close look at what organizations stands to gain from carbon taxes and complete fascist controls/taxation of all transportation and energy production and transactions. A few million dollar injected into the debate by Exxon is pretty minimal compared to the billions to made on the other side of the debate.
Just take a look at who is heavily invested in the carbon credit system that is soon to be pushed upon us:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22663
Posted by: skeptic | January 04, 2009 at 01:49 AM
To follow up, Greenpeace's founder doesn't speak for Greenpeace. He speaks for the nuclear industry.
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/nuclear/patric-moore-background-inform
"Patrick Moore, a paid spokesman for the nuclear industry, frequently cites a long-ago affiliation with Greenpeace to gain legitimacy in the media. Several media outlets recently either stated or implied that Mr. Moore still represents Greenpeace, or failed to mention his current ties to the nuclear industry. This page contains all the information journalists need to accurately describe Mr. Moore and to judge his credibility. We've included some information below and have attached several recent articles about Mr. Moore."
Posted by: Kristin | January 05, 2009 at 10:06 AM