Emails from "attack ad" science group posted

Readers may recall this story last week: Ad hoc group wants to run attack ads

Here’s an update from by Myron Ebell

According to recently disclosed e-mails from a National Academies of Science listserv, prominent climate scientists affiliated with the U.S. National Academies of Science have been planning a public campaign to paper over the damaged reputation of global warming alarmism.  Their scheme would involve officials at the National Academies and other professional associations producing studies to endorse the researchers’ pre-existing assumptions and create confusion about the revelations of the rapidly expanding “Climategate” scandal.

The e-mails were first reported in a front-page story by Stephen Dinan in the Washington Times today. The Competitive Enterprise Institute has independently obtained copies of the e-mails.  A list of excerpts, with descriptive headlines written by me, can be found below.  The entire file of e-mails has been posted as a PDF and can be read here.

In my view, the response of these alarmist scientists to the Climategate scientific fraud scandal has little to do with their responsibilities as scientists and everything to do with saving their political position.  The e-mails reveal a group of scientists plotting a political strategy to minimize the effects of Climategate in the public debate on global warming.

Selected Excerpts.

Note that the descriptive headlines in italics are by me. The statements in quotation marks are excerpts from the e-mails.

Can we get corporate funding for some splashy ads in the NY Times?

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 26: “I will accept corporate sponsorship at a 5 to 1 ratio….”

But our ads will be untainted by corporate influence.

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Over the past 24 h I have been amazed and encouraged at the support my proposal has received from Section 63 and beyond. We have had about 15 pledges for $1000!  I want to build on that good will and make sure that the facts about the climate system are presented to a very large section of the public—unfiltered by the coal, oil and gas industries….”

What is it about the New York Times?  Aren’t Paul Krugman and Thomas Friedman enough?

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Op eds in the NY Times and other national newspapers would also be great.”

Scientists should be effecting social and political change.

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 26:  “I want the NAS to be a transformational agent in America.”

Snow in Washington is anecdotal, but no snow in Vancouver is proof.

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “…the coal, oil and gas industries (who, ironically, are running commercials on NBC for the winter Olympics, while the weather is so warm that snow has to be imported to some of the events.)”

Robert Paine, Feb. 27: “The beltway’s foolishness about climate change seems especially ironic given the snowless plight of the Vancouver Olympics.”

David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I’d add that Edmonton is near snowless….”

This is a political fight, and we’ve got to get dirty.

Paul R. Ehrlich, Feb. 27: “Most of our colleagues don’t seem to grasp that we’re not in a gentlepersons’ debate, we’re in a street fight against well-funded, merciless enemies who play by entirely different rules.”

Top scientists adore Al Gore.

David Schindler, Feb. 27: “I recall an event at the Smithsonian a couple of eons ago that I thought did a great job, & got lots of media coverage. AL Gore spoke….”

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “Al Gore has a very well written article in the NY Times.”

Forget the science, we want energy rationing!

William Jury, Feb. 27: “I am seeing formerly committed public sector leaders backing off from positions aimed at reducing our fossil fuel dependence.”

They’ll forget Climategate if an authoritative institution repeats the same old line.

Paul Falkowski, Feb. 27: “An NRC report would be useful.”

Steve Carpenter, Feb. 27: “We need a report with the authority of the NAS that summarizes the status and trends of the planet, and the logical consequences of plausible responses.”

David Tilman: Feb. 27: “It would seem wise to have the panel [writing the report] not include IPCC members.”

Stephen H. Schneider, Mar. 1: “National Academies need to be part of this….”

Stephen H. Schneider, Mar 1: “It is imperative that leading scientific societies coordinate a major press event….”

The last academic defense: It’s McCarthyism!

Stephen H. Schneider, Mar. 1: “…Senator Inhofe, in a very good impression of the infamous Joe McCarthy, has now named 17 leading scientists involved with the IPCC as potential climate ‘criminals’.  ….  I am hopeful that all the forces working for honest debate and quality assessments will decry this McCarthyite regression, and by name point out what this Senator is doing by a continuing smear campaign.  ….  Will the media have the fortitude to take this on–I’m betting a resounding ‘yes!’” [Note that Schneider has already sent this e-mail to the media asking for their help.]

To read all the e-mails that CEI has obtained, go to the PDF posted here.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

“This is a political fight, and we’ve got to get dirty”
I give them two thumbs up. They’ve achieved their goal. It makes me so happy I ultimately decided to go into engineering and not science.

This kind of smear campaign does nothing to restore the credibility of climate science. The exact opposite, in fact.


i don’t get why this is still possible… don’t they ever learn not to say this stuff in official foia-able emails?


Amazing that this Falkowski fellow thinks a snowless Vancouver means something. We frequently have no snow in the winter.
Having the Olympics on our North Shore mountains was always a gamble.
What’s less of a gamble is that some scientists today will spew any old nonsense without having done some empirical research.

Al Gore's Holy Hologram

Are these guys using drugs? They are getting close to UFOs and other conspiracy theories.

David Ball

You should have printed the email where Erhlich goes “Muahahahaha” at the end.

So much for that rebuilding trust idea.

Doug in Seattle

I really really hope they do it. I also hope the AAAS and NAS endorse it to the hilt. And finally I hope reasonable people see through the hyperbole and finally see exactly who it is that is peddling this cr@p.

Latimer Alder

I’m sure that these guys ae doing their campaigning in their own time..and not on the taxpayers dime.
No doubt their pubilcly available timesheets, together with the audited accounts of the money spent from any research grants will show this clearly and unequivocally.
Just in case anyone is so impolite as to have any doubts.

Some quotes from Paul Falkowski
– Regardless of the evidence, cell phones cause brain cancer.
– One result is that fewer and fewer Americans want their children to be scientists.
– I feel I must help us use our scientific expertise and prowess to push back against the wall of disinformation and lies that has come to be the common forum of what is the news and information flow.
Wow, this is what the best scientist are today? Obviously, we all receive a big check from the fossil fuel industries, are here to deceive, we don’t care about the future of our children, we spread lies and disinformation.
I am pro nuclear and shouting to anyone that will listen to switch from fossil fuel ASAP to nuclear if we are to survive and provide clean power to humanity.
I have been documenting and searching for the truth for years, telling my two child about it all.
I have help my children be aware of alarmist and understand that the real debate is not climate change, but energy.
I feel personally attacked by many of these statements.
Please let me know if you find anything on my blog that would show that I lie, being paid by big oil or there to deceive.
Like you say, those people are afraid of their job.


I’m so glad these Climate er… Biologists are getting into the fray…

There’s that word again. “Transformational”. I don’t think it means what they think it means (with apologies to Inigio Montoya). When Falkowski, Erhlich and Schneider have served their purpose, Soros will discard them like a kleenex.

Leon Brozyna

Tsk, tsk, tsk …
I sense a nightmare world ruled by scientists and a technological elite. But then, it’s been written about some time ago, hasn’t it?
These guys really need to get out into the real world.


Dear Myron
A great piece which would be better without the descriptive headlines. The best thing about the Climatgate emails was just reading them and judging them for ones self.


We need a separation of science and state, as science has become religion.


The Great Green House Conspiracy

Is this the same Steven Schneider at about 6.30mins in. Was he telling the truth then?
(Video originally seen on Watts)


these activists are talking as if they own and control the national academy of science. and they probably do.

Dave Wendt

Anybody got the email address for Big Oil. I need to get ahold of them and let them know I haven’t been receiving my checks. Maybe they’ve got the wrong address in their files.

Stephen M

Paul Ehrlich’s book “The Population Bomb” was used as a first-year biology textbook in many colleges in the 70’s. He was responsible for poisoning the minds of a generation, and the repercussions have been evidenced in childlessness, abortion, Luddite-ism, “green” associated with self-hatred and self-abnegation.
The damage he’s already done is really significant, seeing as he was wrong about everything — but he’s apparently not done yet.


There goes snow in Vancouver again. Why don’t these jerks just say what they really mean… “Hey retards, if it’s warm it’s climate if it’s cold it’s weather. WTF do you not get about that?”
To call these people scientists is a great disservice to real scientists, both past and present.
The McCarthy line is really too much. What is it, Every bad word spoken against AGW and every suspected link to Big Oil is documented there – there’s even a page against Pielke Jr.

Dr A Burns

Are all the alarmist “scientists” in this group biologists ?

Layne Blanchard

Well, here we have right here…proof that the planet is just a scorchin up more than ever…|main|dl2|link2|

Roger Carr

To me, it will forever be, Climategrate…


What Section 63? Distribution and Repurchase of Securities? What are these climate scientistists into? Collusion monies with corporations 5 to 1? Don’t understand.


I believe Inhofe has made a tactical error, he’s given them the opportunity to imply that the scientists are being persecuted for their beliefs, that’s what they’re putting out.
They seem to be ignoring the fact that the science is in tatters because of obvious malfeasance and they clearly thing Mann shouldn’t have been investigated, not because they didn’t think there may have been malfeasance, but because to do so was giving in to the forces of evil.
If I was working in climate science and was surrounded by these eco-zealots in senior positions I’d keep my head down and say I supported AGW else I suspect I’d be toast.

Phillip Bratby

So this is post-modern science in action? Thank goodness I’m old enough to have been a real scientist. This is enough to make it embarassing to admit to being a scientist.


A Note to the IPCC…
Global warming “has no impact on Himalayas” claims Wadia Director
“According to the data for over 140 years available with a British weather observatory situated in Mukteswar (2311m) in Almora has actually revealed that temperature in that region witnessed a dip of 0.4ºC,” he said.
Since 1991, the institute is monitoring the Himalayas extensively with focusing the glacial studies and last twenty year data has never witnessed a continual retreat. Sometimes, the recession rates have gone up but on an average the rate is very much safer, he added.

John Silver


So according to Falkowski, Hollywood, the government, and business should help them develop radio and TV programming which should be streamed into every school in America?


As biologists I;m sure they’ll be aware of evolutionary dead-ends, especially when they’re so far up one.
PS – Stephen M, no need to crusade on here (the A-word). It’s very off topic.


Stunning! How can educated people be so appallingly dense? How naive to believe that this flimsy plan would not get blown at some point, and do even greater damage to the standing and reputation of the scientists involved. I bet their favoured journalists will be interested to see how they were going to be used.

Rab e

Mr. Briggs commented on the subject too:

Baa Humbug

Bwahahaha Did anyone else catch Schneiders self deprecation? LMAO

“Please don’t make me miss yet another prediction!@#$% I have to live with cooling to warming “flipflop” every day,”

Bwahahah haha bwahahah
Miss? The fool couldn’t hit the side of a barn door with a truck lol


On Sat, Feb27, 2010 @ 6:16 pm Paul Flakowski wrote:

“People who have an open mind are wondering about an absence of any coordinated and publicized response to recent anti GW advocates on the part of the mainstream scientific community.

What people are those ? Most folks don’t think “GW” is that
big of a problem, and a whole block of other people don’t
think about it at all.
He then wrote:

Clearly a paid advertisement in the NYT will help us get our opinions out unimpeded.

They will be selling their opinions of the science, but
not necessarily saying that it’s opinions they’re handing out.
As you read through the other National Acadamy of Science
linkserv emails at
You’ll see that the real target audiences for this publicity
campaign will be power figures (politicians & corporate
leaders) and opinion leaders (media reporters & editors) to
set up a steamroller that quashes the pesky voices of the
“anti GW” crowd once and for all time.
How will they do it? By using their memberships in NAS as a
badge of honor and a crutch, they’re going to sell the
The NAS members in the other Sections should feel cheapened
by such antics.


Bring it on, these guy have spent so much time shooting themselves in to foot, their now standing on their knees.They just don’t seem to understand that fear is a very short term motivator, and it quickly turns to anger. The more they try to scare people now, the more angry they are going to make everyone.

Looks they have a mole inside.
Falkowski – what a [self-snip], his own University says the NH snow cover has been reaching record extent.

Baa Humbug

Also from Schneider..

“enough is enough; lets put the country and planet first, and do it by credible reporting of our state of knowledge, not selective citation of information pushing one sided agendas.”

Haven’t we been saying that for years? The man has been reading sceptic blogs.
The hypocrasy is palpable

This item appeared in the UK “News of the World” and looks like it could have been “placed ” by the WWF . I have tried to comment on the piece but it seems to be tightly moderated. Dark deeds afoot.

i think bigoil’s email is


These people are delusional. That is not hyperbole… delusional and dangerous.
Warmer in Edmonton during an el nino? Wow… rocket science there… and I will never figure out how they have convinced themselves that their gargantuan funding, including massive oil industry dollars, can possibly be threatened by a few piddling dollars Exxon played around with over 10 years ago.
Apparently when you’re well financed and pushing a load of BS virtually uncontested for two decades, it’s disheartening to see that people are not as stupid as you thought they were.
These people make me ill. And that’s not hyperbole either. Physically ill at the thought that they have any sort of power or control, that they write crap that kids will be forced to read in school, that they have the funding to make stuff like their “science on pbs” scheme happen, and that they’re not currently institutionalized.

Al Gored

Dr A Burns (23:58:38) :
Are all the alarmist “scientists” in this group biologists
Not real biologists. The new pseudoscience called Conservation Biology is the next link in this chain. This “crisis disciplne” – that’s what they call it -begins with the ‘no debate’ premise that everything is doomed and tailors everything to fit. Not exactly the objective scientific approach. Those are the people that ‘proved’ that highest global polar bear population in recorded history, with most subpopulations growing or stable, were shrinking and, for the EPA, endangered!
Note that the population used most often for their media poster child is the one in Hudson Bay, the southernmost one in the world. Like focusing on the Antarctic Pensinsula or one of the chosen thermometers.
Vast Conservation Biology industry interest in long term studies of the effect of climate change on whatever.


So Ehrlich didn’t think it was enough to scare the *** out of one or two generations of worried young men and women, now he’s going to scare our kids, too! And the sad thing is that if the AGW scare delays the development of the poorest countries, it will delay the stabilization of their populations, too.

This is a political fight, and we’ve got to get dirty.
So, insults, lies, fraud, and intimidation are just the start? What’s left, Ben Salter in a Power Ranger™ suit popping us in the snoot until we recant?
I can’t wait for the next dramatic episode.
Popcorn, anybody?

Charles, the comment below ,which I tried to post earlier is surely on topic ? The newspaper item is a blatant freebie for WWF . Please ignore this comment if you are still moderating the early morning post 🙂
This item appeared in the UK “News of the World” and looks like it could have been “placed ” by the WWF . I have tried to comment on the piece but it seems to be tightly moderated. Dark deeds afoot.


Darwin awards anyone?

Paul Erlich was the darling of the social science faculty members when I was a university staffer in the early 1960s. It was not a comfortable experience when I said in a common room after reading his first blockbuster that I thought Erlich was an idiot. Time has proved me right and Erlich wrong, but for some reason his opinions still matter in those circles. Don’t those academics still in Erkich’s thrall ever observe what happens in the real and observable world over time?

Van Grungy
George L

The staggering theme running through all of the emails is that science itself is under attack simply because other qualified scientists, – some perhaps more qualified to question their scientific data than they – have the ‘effrontery’ to question their papers on the single subject of global warming.
When, in the history of scientific research, has it been necessary for scientific theory to be supported against a measured opposing viewpoint, by organised a major advertising campaign? can scientific data no longer be defended by the data itself ? Why do these people get so upset at many of their own kind having a different viewpoint? And why do they try to spread lies and obfuscation about the motives behind anyone who dares to question whether AGW is fact or fiction?
A feeling of panic pervades throughout all their correpondence. They need to be careful otherwise they will lose their argument completely to a growing sceptical publiic who question their departure from the normally accepted procedures for presenting scientific research data.


Those 15 contributors to this fiasco must be trying to distance themselves and fast before they are exposed and their research called into question.
Or are most of them part of the 17 under investigation?

Gail Combs

NickB. (23:56:54) :
“…The McCarthy line is really too much. What is it, Every bad word spoken against AGW and every suspected link to Big Oil is documented there – there’s even a page against Pielke Jr.”
What is amusing about the McCarthy line was history has shown him to be essentially correct! There were Communists under the bed, Oh My If you want to meet them go to Cambridge MA. Wear a global warming denier shirt and they will be happy to scream in your face "When we take over, we will kill people like you…" i got that reaction from wearing a pro gun ownership shirt.
If you want the Big Oil connections go to
and check out the various Rockefeller foundations (Standard Oil money) and see how much they are giving WWF and Greenpeace, the favorite authors for IPCC peer reviewed reports.