Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Well, I woke up to some bad news this morning. It turns out that the GAO, the US General Accounting Office, says US has been secretly hiding their funding of the IPCC for the last decade.
They were already told not to do that by the GAO. In the 2005 GAO report with the swingeing title of “Federal Reports on Climate Change Funding Should Be Clearer and More Complete”, the GAO said … well, basically what the title said. But noooo, those sneaky bureaucrats didn’t do that at all.
The latest 2011 GAO Report says the US government has not changed their ways. They have been clandestinely providing about half the operating funds for the IPCC for the last decade. In other words, the IPCC funding arrangements are of a piece with their “scientific” claims and their other actions—secretive, shabby, with a hidden agenda, and full of disinformation.
The report says that the State Department provided $19 million dollars to the IPCC. Thanks, guys. Foolish me, I hadn’t realized that paying for bureaucrats to go party in Cancun and Durban was part of the function of the United States Department of State.
I also found out that the IPCC got $12.1 million dollars from the US Global Change Research Program. That one really angrifies my blood. The IPCC flat out states that they do not do a single scrap of scientific research … so why is the US Global Change Research Program giving them a dime, much less twelve million, that was supposed to go for research? I could use that for my research, for example …
The 2011 GAO report had some strong advice for the climate profiteers behind this secretive funding. They said:
“Congress and the public cannot consistently track federal climate change funding or spending over time,”
Oh, no, wait, that’s what the GAO said back in 2005. Unfortunately, they have no enforcement powers. What they said this time around was that the funding information:
“… was not available in budget documents or on the websites of the relevant federal agencies, and the agencies are generally not required to report this information to Congress.”
In other words … no change from 2005.
Congressfolk, you are not paying attention. These guys are taking money for research and using it to party in Durban and other nice places around the planet. And the US has been secretly funding them for a decade.
Can anyone name for me one valuable thing that the IPCC has done? Can anyone point to an accomplishment by the IPCC that justifies their existence? Because I can’t. They throw a good party, to be sure, their last global extravaganza had 10,000 guests … but as for advancing the climate discussion, they have done nothing but push it backwards.
And the next Assessment Report, AR5, will be even more meaningless than the last. This time, people are watching them refuse to require conflict-of-interest statements from the authors. This time, people are watching them appoint known serial scientific malfeasants to positions of power in the writing of the report. This time, people are keeping track of the petty machinations of the railroad engineer that’s running the show despite calls from his own supporters to step down.
As a result, the AR5 report from the IPCC has been pre-debunked. It will be published to no doubt great fanfare and sink like a stone, dragged down by the politicized, poorly summarized bad science and rewarmed NGO puff pieces that the IPCC is promoting as though they were real science.
Folks … can we call a long overdue halt to this IPCC parade of useless and even antiscientific actions? Can we stop the endless partying at taxpayer expense? Can we “trow da bums out” and get back to climate science?
Please?
I say DEFUND THE IPCC NOW!
w.
PS—The GAO report is available here. And all is not lost, at least one Congressman is working to defund the IPCC:
Wrapped into the many amendments recently passed by the House of Representatives — a total of $60 billion in spending cuts that the president called a “nonstarter” — was one by Republican Missouri Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer that would prohibit $13 million in taxpayer dollars from going to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the group whose occasional missteps have been the source of countless confrontations among climate scientists over the past year.
…
A congressional aide told FoxNews.com that he plans to pursue the bill — regardless of whether it is passed in the larger Republican budget.
“The congressman plans to continue his effort to stop taxpayer support of the IPCC and remains cautiously optimistic that the Senate will take the amendment,” said Keith Beardslee, a spokesman for the congressman. “Failing that, Blaine has reintroduced separate legislation he first introduced in the 111th Congress to halt funding to the IPCC.”
GO MISSOURI! GO LUETKEMEYER!!
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
GO, WILLIS! I pray all the time that the general public finally understands that they have been completely SCREWED by a MINORITY of idiot progressives, whose whole philosophy has now been shown to be junk. If you look at the history books, especially re: Germany, you could get very sick to your stomach…
yes a thousand times yes
the global warming scare only ends with the wholesale sacking of public servants
Samuel Adams says:
January 5, 2012 at 11:57 am
Glad you liked it, I enjoy putting those kinds of easter eggs in my work.
w.
Kay B. Day says:
January 5, 2012 at 12:45 pm
Stole it from Satchell Paige …
w.
Erinome says:
January 5, 2012 at 1:20 pm
I wouldn’t mind the State Department studying the issue. Actually I would, but that would be tolerable.
Unfortunately, giving money to a bunch of pseudo-scientists and parasites like the IPCC is not “studying” anything.
If it’s so noble, why are they funding them so secretly?
w.
Add my vote in to defund & delete the IPCC and the UN!
GAO has a valid point. The taxpaying public is unaware of the myriad ways that monies are being siphoned off into this sham. Every agency has some sort of climate change initiative. Some of them are so preposterous it would be funny if not true (and costly). Add all of them together and how many trillions have we wasted?
And how did we ever end up in a situation where the science was suddenly settled, the remedy prescribed and then forced onto all nations? When did I have my opportunity as a citizen of a democratic nation to vote on all of this? It was all forced onto us.
End the IPCC, UN, Ethanol subsidies, solar & windmill subsidies etc etc etc….
Mike says:
January 5, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Nope. The report says that in what looks like a typical UN scam, money listed for one organization is “passed through” to another organization to avoid oversight. That doesn’t make it better, that makes it worse.
w.
Phil M. says:
January 5, 2012 at 6:45 pm
“To be sure, $3.1 million a year (since FY2001) is nothing to sneeze at. That’s the number the GAO gave in the link you provided, by the way.”
You ignore the far greater economic impacts that result from enacting IPCC-inspired policies. In your book, those are probably beneficial (like giving 500mio to Solyndra and have them evaporated); but for sane people, this counts as damages.
Great post as always Willis!
Up here in BC, I’m thankful the Canadian government has pulled out of the ridiculous Kyoto scheme. After reading your post, I wondered how much our government gave to the IPCC, UNFCCC,
Sadly, I got an answer all too easily.
http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=5F50D3E9-1#UNFCCC
Aside from claiming that ” Canada is contributing $1.2 billion in new and additional climate change financing for the fiscal years 2010/11, 2011/12 and 2012/2013″, making me retch, I scrolled down to shamefully see that
“Canada’s Contribution to the UNFCCC: $763,000 in fast-start financing, combined with other international assistance for a total $1 million” a year.
Ugh. Never wrote a letter to a politician before, but I’m temped to write one to our Environment Minister Peter Kent, who was the voice of reason in pulling out of Kyoto. Now if we can stop funding all these other obvious schemes.
Phil M. says:
January 5, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Not sure what your point is, Phil. Are you telling me I should be outraged at the cost of the wars? I am. So? What on earth does that have to do with the IPCC?
In addition, defunding the IPCC would save much more than the $30 million bucks. The IPCC is one of the centers of disinformation masquerading as climate science. It is a main excuse for the ongoing wasting billions and billions of dollars.
More to the point, it is the focus of efforts to make energy more expensive, and that kills children. I lived a good part of my life in the developing world, including in LDCs. I’ve seen what high energy costs do to the poor.
Now, you may not care about that, and that’s not a problem. Every man has to decide where to put his efforts, and your decision is clearly on protesting war rather than on saving the poor from the ugly and sometimes fatal consequences of expensive energy.
Be clear that I am not saying your focus on the war is bad, or that my focus on energy costs and children’s lives and the poor is “better” somehow. Neither one is true.
Which is why it is entirely improper of you to try to decide what I should focus on. You focus on what you want … I will focus on what I want. Your suggestion that I am morally wrong in my choice of where to focus my efforts is both impertinent and unpleasant, as is your speculation that it is “really about the money”.
So if you want to talk about the war, fine. This is not the place for that, so I welcome you to discuss it elsewhere. What you have done is the equivalent of entering a group discussing the intricacies of cross-stitching samplers, and abusing them because they’re not protesting injustice in the US court system. Doesn’t work that way.
You get to be upset about whatever upsets you. But you don’t get to come in to my thread and accuse me of not being upset enough about your pet peeve. Go write your own thread about that.
Regards,
w.
J. Felton says:
January 5, 2012 at 8:35 pm
Indeed. First get out of Kyoto, then out of the UNFCCC. You’re on the right path.
w.
Mike says:
January 5, 2012 at 4:01 pm
“The reports says the government OVER stated how much was spent on the IPCC!”
Good! Well, since it is so “little” money let’s just defund the entire corrupt enterprise and no one will know!
Absolutely! Stop funding the IPCC and all associated organizations such as the UNFCCC.
“And the US has been secretly funding them for a decade.”
Who signed off on the funding.
Real people with real names had to sign off on the funding.
Eschenbach’s hawk soars yet again, Much as I love hawks I hope it never soars over my backyard, The birds on my feeder will disappear for weeks in terror. Too bad the hogs at the government trough aren’t so sensitive.
PhilJourdan says:
January 5, 2012 at 11:16 am
“defund the whole UN!”
Absolutely Phil and if the U.S. had any sense they would throw them out of the buildings they use in the U.S. I have watched the U.N. around the world and they serve no purpose at all! Well over 40 years in Cyprus and a U.N. declared illegal invasion by Turkey still carries on.
Having enjoyed all the flap here, it still boils down to who we elect. Accountability is zippo. We are victims of “How to catch a pig.” Some of you will have to go look it up. Willis is spot on with what the vast clear minded folks are thinking. Time to start doing, or is that undoing?
The report says that the State Department provided $19 million dollars to the IPCC. Thanks, guys. Foolish me, I hadn’t realized that paying for bureaucrats to go party in Cancun and Durban was part of the function of the United States Department of State.
————-
Willis, Do you know for sure that the IPCC funded the Cancun or Durban conferences or is this just assumed.
Yep.
Seems that the Cancun and Durban conferences are NOT funded by the IPCC.
http://unfccc.int/secretariat/history_of_the_secretariat/items/1218.php
To summarise they are funded by the UN.
I wonder what references to the IPCC I would actually find in the GAO report. Is it going to be direct funding or some accounting calculation or nothing at all?
Willis great post as usual, the IPCC is a waste of time and money.Politicians always protect the status quo that gives them continuity of porking (I can make up verbs). My own personal way forward is to try and get the MSM thinking better, don’t buy anything they produce, defund the MSM and they will start to liven up. Tell them what you think about the IPCC on line. Ask them to do editorials on the hypocrisy of the IPCC. Nothing happens, approach their advertisers.
You are a very eloquent writer, maybe start a campaign?
The aforesaid railroad engineer is listed on the Internet as consulting to Deutsch Bank in 2008. Have a look at some of the other names in the Annual Report and use your imagination. Maybe the GAO can get an idea from linkages such as this –
Climate Change Advisory Board
Lord Browne
Managing Director and
Managing Partner (Europe) of
Riverstone Holdings LLC
John Coomber
Member of the Board of Directors
Swiss Re
Fabio Feldmann
CEO, Fabio Feldmann Consultores
Zhang Hongren
Former President International
Union of Geological Science
Amory B. Lovins
Chairman & CEO,
Rocky Mountain Institute
Lord Oxburgh
Dr. R K Pachauri
Chairman, IPCC
Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
Director, Potsdam Institute for
Climate Impact Research (PIK)
Robert Socolow
Co-Director,
Carbon Mitigation Initiative
Klaus Töpfer
Former German Minister for Environment
Can we play the what’s IPCC stand for game as it’s the weekend.
I’ll start.
Incompetent Pile of Consensus Cronies.
(I would of called them clowns but that’s throwing custard in the face of an honourable profession).
E.M.Smith says: January 5, 2012 at 1:58 pm
‘So yes, de-fund the IPCC, but don’t forget the OTHER thousands of suckers in the flesh of government funding for all the other parts of the “Agenda”…’
FYI
http://www.iclei.org/
The political class has hardwired their funding permanently. Turning it off is much harder than turning it on. We are subjects now. We will need their permission to make changes. They will say no.
Great post, great website.