From the “Bob Ward department”.
![Bob-Ward-293x350[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/bob-ward-293x3501.jpg?quality=83)
Exposed: How top university helped secure £9million of YOUR money by passing off rivals’ research as its own… to bankroll climate change agenda
- One of the world’s leading institutes has claimed credit for its rivals’ work
- Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy made bid for more funds
- It claimed it was responsible for work published before it even existed
One of the world’s leading institutes for researching the impact of global warming has repeatedly claimed credit for work done by rivals – and used it to win millions from the taxpayer.
An investigation by The Mail on Sunday also reveals that when the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP) made a bid for more Government funds, it claimed it was responsible for work that was published before the organisation even existed. Last night, our evidence was described by one leading professor whose work was misrepresented as ‘a clear case of fraud – using deception for financial gain’. The chairman of the CCCEP since 2008 has been Nick Stern, a renowned global advocate for drastic action to combat climate change.
He is also the president of the British Academy, an invitation-only society reserved for the academic elite. It disburses grants worth millions to researchers – and to Lord Stern’s own organisation.
On Friday, the CCCEP – based jointly at the London School of Economics and the University of Leeds – will host a gala at the Royal Society in London in the peer’s honour. Attended by experts and officials from around the world, it is to mark the tenth anniversary of the blockbuster Stern Review, a 700-page report on the economic impact of climate change. The review was commissioned by Tony Blair’s Government.
The review argued that the world had to take immediate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or face much higher future costs. It has exerted a powerful influence on successive British governments and international bodies.
Part of the CCCEP’s official mission, which it often boasts about in its public reports, is to lobby for the policies Lord Stern advocates by presenting the case for them with British and foreign governments and at UN climate talks.
Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’, both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. ‘This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.
The Mail on Sunday investigation reveals today that:
- The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), which has given the CCCEP £9 million from taxpayers since 2008, has never checked the organisation’s supposed publication lists, saying they were ‘taken on trust’;
- Some of the papers the CCCEP listed have nothing to do with climate change – such as the reasons why people buy particular items in supermarkets and why middle class people ‘respond more favourably’ to the scenery of the Peak District than their working class counterparts;
- Papers submitted in an explicit bid to secure further ESRC funding not only had nothing to do with the CCCEP, they were published before it was founded;
- The publication dates of some of these papers on the list are incorrect – giving the mistaken impression that they had been completed after the CCCEP came into existence.
Academics whose work was misrepresented reacted with fury. Professor Richard Tol, a climate change economics expert from Sussex University, said: ‘It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven’t supported, and it’s fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant. I’ve never come across anything like it before. It stinks.’
The paper cited by the CCCEP of which Prof Tol is a co-author was published online by the Ecological Economics journal on July 31, 2008.
…
Mr Ward said the CCCEP is a ‘world class university research centre’, and when it asked for the second slice of funding from the ESRC, it submitted in all ‘520 research and policy outputs’ and 139 media articles. He added: ‘We reject any suggestion that we misrepresented the outputs of the Centre in our submission to the mid-term review.’ He claimed our investigation was an attempt to ‘promote climate change denial’.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yep. Just like it was a ‘mistake’ that got 4 good people killed in Benghazi.
Those ‘pure as the driven snow’ types seem to make a lot of such mistakes. And they are going to cost us tens of $$Trillions and hundreds of millions of lives if people don’t soon wake up.
I mean, ‘WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?’ Right, shrillary?
ClimateOtter
Same with
http://joannenova.com.au/2016/10/us-donors-funding-shut-down-of-australian-mines-ports-and-rail-coordinated-by-hillarys-right-hand-man/
Hillary?
Lots of funds going down under in order to stymie Adani’s investment.These Green activists should be in jail( gaol) .
Just a letter away from CCCP (Old Republic of Soviet Socialist States SSSR)
Anthony, Will you keep us updated on this? It would seem to me that this organization should be shutdown and forced to repay the grants. At the minimum, the scientists should sue the organization. It would be interesting to know if Tol establishes a fund to pay for legal representation.
Re pay the grants??? They should be prosecuted for fraud, embezzlement and misleading the Government.
Now where have I heard that before? Clinton nah, Soros nah, Gore? nah…..
( do I need a sarc tag?)
If anyone thinks something is going to happen? Give your head a shake.
‘Peter R Blower on October 23, 2016 at 3:53 am
Erroneous reporting.
Ward didn’t claim to represent a top-class university research department –
only a world class university.
____________________________________
Wow – sarcasms top –
even sarcasms world class top.
Thanks – Hans
Erroneous reporting.
Ward didn’t claim to represent a top-class university research department – only a world class university research department.
World class must represent the average across the world i.e. “bog-standard”.
Hence this behaviour is now normal practise in the average university research department.
I’d say the CCCEP research was incredible and fantastic.
You just don’t understand that their noble cause excuses anything they do.
Yep, Just imagine if a sceptic organisation did this.
Mistakes can happen !!! these are supposed to be highly intelligent and experienced RESEARCHERS. It doesn’t take much to check out your facts before you publish. Oh, sorry, I’m an old-fashioned scientist that believes in doing real research (know that’s gone out of fashion now )
Well the Stern report was one big mistake, they should apologise for that for starters.
“Well the Stern report was one big mistake”
Yep, bought and paid for by the egregious Tony Blair, just like the ‘Dodgy Dossier’.
Somehow, the “mistakes” happen to favor the position they took. Did any “mistakes” work against them? Funny how that happens. Just like all temperature “adjustments” cool the past and heat the present.
If they do that enough it will need to compound into the LIA period then they can’t say the LIA didn’t exist
One misrepresentation is a mistake.
Two misrepresentations are a serious mistake worth investigating.
Two separate grant submission letters with multiple authorship responsibility misrepresentations is a definite serial intent to defraud.
Send in the investigators.
Send in the Prosecutors.
Send in the taxmen.
Watch them build another whitewash committee to sweep this under the carpet.
We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he (Ward) said.
Sounds about right, after all they’ve been ‘amending mistakes’ in climate data for years.
Such urgency exhibited by Bob Ward.
No concerns, nothing to see here, keep moving and feed us millions of £s.
Schadenfreude.
Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’, both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. ‘This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said…………………………………….”He added: ‘We reject any suggestion that we misrepresented the outputs of the Centre in our submission to the mid-term review.’ He claimed our investigation was an attempt to ‘promote climate change denial’.”
What? We made mistakes in our submissions but reject any suggestion that we misrepresented the outputs of the Center in our submission……
I think he’s trying to say that their mistakes (well, actually, LIES) were used in obtaining funding, but midway through the funding cycle, they’re not lying about what has been funded.
I read it as “we misreprented who published and paid for the work, when the work was done, and even what the work was about… but we never once lied about the results of those studies.”
Sure, you lied about everything else, but we should trust your results?
Yes, but it’s only £9 million from taxpayers since 2008, surely they can afford it?
/sarcoff
sarcoff? Sounds like something Egyptian kings might be buried in.
Nyet. Is good Russian name.
And a Buck Rogers Character
“The publication dates of some of these papers on the list are incorrect – giving the mistaken impression that they had been completed after the CCCEP came into existence”
The dates were adjusted upwards for good reason and all the unadjusted data is available to anyone who doesn’t ask for it
Looking forward to hearing more from Prof Tol on this
Humorous search result I forgot a 3rd c CCEP The Certified Compliance & Ethics Professional
Fraud is fraud, no ifs buts or maybes CPS should investigate and take appropriate action.
In your judgment what would be the odds of “appropriate action” being taken? Your much closer to the players than I or almost everyone else here are. Based on history my judgment is that nothing will be done. Am I wrong?
I agree, RAH. As long as you have the right agenda, any of your “mistakes” will be unreported and quietly buried.
. . should have our FBI director give ’em a good tongue lashing anyway . .
If there is a sufficient case, as it currently seems, then the LSE should be held accountable and prosecuted. There is a new culture growing in the UK since Brexit. One that is welcomed not just by the public but also those in power who have so far been silent about the misuse of authority that has presided through the ‘socialist’ era. An era that is now ending.
I sure hope we can Amexit . .
Easy mistake to make.
By the way, on a completely unrelated matter, I have written what I consider to be a rather good book. It is a bit long but very good reading. I knocked it out in Russian as an exercise for my evening classes so if anyone wants a copy just let me know. I think I will call it War and Peace.
I don’t read Russian, but if you translate it into English I’ll take a copy. 🙂
Pity they didn’t also claim authorship of “An Inconvenient Truth”. Now THAT would have been a show worth watching!
You sure that isn’t Warrens Piece?
It just goes to show how arrogant & corrupt climate science (AGW) has become, this is probably the new norm!
Remember when the BBC lied by claiming they had met with the world’s top climate scientists, when they were only activists from WWF, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, etc? There were no repercussions, because the BBC was telling the “correct” global warming storyline.
Chances are nothing happens to Bob Ward, Stern, etc., because they are also telling the “correct” story.
But at some point reality has to prevail, and there will be consequences.
Mistakes happen. But apparently untested, unproven computer models are sinless and perfect.
oh please…….they simply mis-spoke and can’t remember
There’s face to glue onto your voodoo doll.
Will the theft of so much public money attract the attention of plod?
CCC
EP => CCCPAbsolutely delicious.
Stern’s economics is hopeless as demonstrated by his Review so removing the ‘E’ is appropriate.
Usually when stuff like this surfaces it’s only the tip of the iceberg. Would be nice to see some real journalism for a change and get to the bottom of this. In the US real journalism is dead. It’s now only propaganda.
I think of the hidden nature of fungi growth rather than an iceberg because these are not harmful if left alone, and they are often quite scenic. Being from the USA, I think, in this sense, of the inoculation of our science and government by Al Gore and friends.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungus
WRI/World Resources Institute
Annual Report 2009
P.13: The Guardian, U.K., Formed a content sharing partnership with WRI.
http://www.pdf.wri.org/wri_annual_report_2009.pdf
The Guardian, U.K. also features Naomi Klein.
Try: http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/wri_annual_report_2009.pdf
“Mistakes can happen”……… to any climate change alarmist seeking £9 million for spreading further propaganda!
Bluff and bluster from Bob Ward, but no talk of making arrangements to return any of the money.
When you have ever heard that a con-artist ever gave willfully any money back!
The best return as far as I can tell, in these cases would be in the lines of ” that this all did happen for your own best” kinda of reply.
When and where the fraudster even takes the position of a Zen teacher……………..with no shame and remorse at all.
cheers
a con-artist ever gave willfully any money back!
==========
hey, if you are stupid enough to believe the con-man, whose fault is it if you get bilked. certainly not the con-man. it isn’t like they held you up with a gun and forced the money from you.
so, from the con-mans point of view, they are completely justified in taking your money. so why should politicians feel any different? After all you were the ones stupid enough to believe them.
the only big difference between a con-man and a politician is that the con-man doesn’t have the ability to force you to give them money. the politician however has the tax department to force money from your wallet, under pain of imprisonment.
and while the con-man can go to jail for telling you lies, it is completely legal for politicians to lie to you. A politician can break any promise with impunity, why you and I would find ourselves before the courts should we do the same.
con-artist motto:
” The lesson’s worth a cheese, don’t you agree?” ( The_Fox_and_the_Crow )
paqyfelyc
October 24, 2016 at 6:00 am
🙂
In another way,,,, nothing new under the sun, only the gravity of the situation at the moment………..
I am driven to conclude that, in today’s “climate science is settled” mindset, the only mistake is getting caught faking. Getting rich is more important than living a life of integrity. This same attitude pervades politics and finance.
Getting rich is more important than living a life of integrity.
=============
when people see scum bags getting rich by lying and cheating, and honest people getting trampled under foot, it doesn’t take long before there are no honest people. Corruption follows and the rot sets in. Eventually heads will roll, sometimes the rich, but more typically the poor will pay the price.
Anthony, we need another special link along with the Sea Ice page and Solar data page, etc., as a place to document these AGW scammers and fraudsters. CCCEP, #Exxonknew state AG’s, Shukla, Gleick, and their ilk need to be documented for easy reference. You have the venue to keep these shamed names on a handy reference page.
Yes great idea!
Let us not use their characterization. They want us to believe that an organization which supposedly does science can’t keep track of what papers they have published nor even has a record of when said organization was established and first started to publish. Those that believe that I guess could describe their actions as a “mistake” but for the rest of us that live on this planet, it’s criminal FRAUD, plain and simple.
They will probably get even more funding as a result of these “mistakes”.
In climate science, the more you make up, the more resources the grant funding agencies provide. In addition, if an institute on the pro-global warming side gets into any kind of trouble, they just get more resources from the grant agencies as a form of protecting them.