Follow the money – why Heartland is a big threat

I’ve had a change of heart. I’ve been sent some new data, after seeing it, I’ve decided that The Heartland Institute is actually a terrible threat to science in the USA. As “Deep Throat” famously said (in the movie), “follow the money”. Well here it is, all laid out. I hope the public relations experts at DeSmog run this.

Oh, wait.

And actually, if you look at Heartland’s Gleick-grabbed budget plan, the actual numbers spent on climate programs are a fraction of that 6.5 million total budget.

No wonder our friends are so scared of Heartland, they are effective for next to nothing by comparison to US government climate programs. Thanks to Josh at cartoonsbyjosh.com for the artwork.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
GeoLurking

Taxed Enough Already?

Bernie

Can you imagine the havoc if HI spent their entire budget of clarifying climate science!

Very funny, actually, in a sad sort of way.
I’m still waiting, of course, for Big Oil to send me scads of money to tell lies and undercut the CAGW scenario. My Ford Excursion has a big, expensive tank to fill — heck, they can skip the money and just send my my own tanker full of gasoline to park in the backyard!
However, all of that money (or gasoline!) fails to show up. I’m starting to think that is is really just a myth, that CAGW deniers are secretly funded by Big Oil.
Hey, BP! Look, I’m your man! I’m easy, I can be bought! Please send me one of those preloaded BP credit cards with enough on it to keep my cars full for the next decade or so, and I’ll continue to attack bad CAGW science!
Maybe I should try threats — if you don’t send me money, I might switch sides. From Anthony’s piles up above, it should be pretty easy to divert some of the many billions being spent into my own pockets.
And all I have to do to get it is lie…
rgb

trbixler

Mr. Green and his minions continue to spend gobs of taxpayer money as they wish. But the regulations spawned by this alarmist fallacy is even worse.

Tony McGough

The heartbreak is, that for that class of money you could have put clean water and decent drains into every cottage on the planet. Instead, it has gone into getting moonbeams from cucumbers.

I remember when the DeSmogBlog started, I would look at the things they said in amazement at the stupidity. I thought to myself that the thing would either go under or they’d wizen up a bit, even it stayed misguided. They were so obviously PR guys on assignment who didn’t have a clue.
Well, my bad. Skipped going over there for a few years until this Heartland scandal (as in, what was done to Heartland and the poor reporting of same). When I took a look recently, it hadn’t improved a bit.
How is it even possible for adults to work on something for years and not pick up at least a little knowledge? Even by accident?

Dickens Goes Metro

What about all of the private foundation money flowing into warmist coffers?

Can we get a coffee mug “Climate Skeptics Do It Better”?

Peter Miller

That is truly one scary schematic – all that money going to money heaven and all for absolutely nothing – and even worse none of that wasted money sticks to me.
But you are right, Heartland is clearly grossly overfunded. Otherwise organisations like it and WUWT would not be winning the argument on supposed global warming. Perhaps if the government doubled the climate research budget, that might help it compete with Heartland, WUWT etc – that’s it, we need to demand a level playing field, or those deniers will never be stopped.

I might as well try to be the first to say “it’s worse than we thought.” Admittedly, that line is getting tired.
Talk about a one-sided fight.

Luther Wu

Add in WWF, Green Peace and all the green whatevers, plus all the props money spent by the MSM and rags like Nature, SA, etc.
This isn’t David and Goliath, it’s more like Goliath and the gnat.

Goodcash for justice equity!
Goodcash for justice equity!
*bangs bongos*

Scottish Sceptic

The ratio is some 100 even 1000 to 1. But ask a warmists what they think the ration is and they will tell you it is the other way around.
In other words, the difference between the true funding ratio and the warmists belief is probably of the order of 10,000 even 1,000,000 to 1.
How can people be so absolutely, completely utterly deluded as the warmists?

Richard M

And, if you look at the global values it gets much worse. Anyone have EU numbers?

Chris B

So why don’t the watermelons throw a little chump change to Heartland to get them to lobby for the CAGW side.
.03% oughta cover it.
Problem solved.

Amazing how those ignorant flat-earth deniers gave away secret details of their villainous donors, nefarious strategems and well-funded henchmen (like Watts) – then entrapped a Macarthur Genius and AGU ethics guru into identity theft, wire fraud and libel. Fortunately, when Dr. Gleick faces criminal and civil prosecutions for this, he can fall back on a classic defense: “the devil made me do it!”

Luther Wu

All of those “might, may, maybe, could, possibly, extrapolated, expected, projected and probables” cost money.

John from CA

It might make more sense to compare Heartland to other privately funded groups like Green Peace?

Chris B

What about Greenpeace, WWF, Sierra Club, et al?

Chris B

What about the myriad NGO’s, University departments, MSM outlets, etc?

jon spencer

The “follow the money” quote was only in the movie.
It was not said by FBI Associate Director Mark Felt, who was Deep Throat.

Scottish Sceptic

As for the BiG-OIL lie. Why would BIG-OIL fund us? They are all doing very well from this scam. Just five minutes on the internet and of the five companies usually meant by BIG-OIL I can easily find they all have interests in wind energy:-
BP – link
Chevron – link
ExxonMobil – link
Shell – link
Total – link

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
~ Upton Sinclair

M Courtney

Of course the better comparison would be with a green NGO; the Sierra Club, FOTE or Greenpeace.
But it’s still just a joke. A more interesting question is why anyone thinks the money is what brainwashes people?
For sure, if the science was settled then there’ld no need to keep an open mind but why would anyone think those who do look into a subject are persuaded by presentation and not the nature of the physical data. Yamal, the missing heat, the mispalacenment of the MWP and the fact that CO2 concentration follow global temps by 800 years are all more persuasive than a right wing pressure group who alienate many of us who aren’t right wing.
Can anyone tell me why Heartland’s funding is thought to be so effective?

Frank K.

Ahhh…the Climate Ca$h writ large! Excellent graphic.
I think Pink Floyd said it best…
Money (aka Climate Ca$h)
Get away
You get a good job with good pay and you’re okay
Money It’s a gas
Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash
New car, caviar, four star daydream
Think I’ll buy me a football team
Money Well, get back
I’m all right Jack
Keep your hands off of my stack
Money It’s a hit
Don’t give me that do goody good [Climate Research]
I’m in the high-fidelity first class travelling set
I think I need a Lear jet
Money It’s a crime
Share it fairly
But don’t take a slice of my pie
Money So they say Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a raise It’s no surprise that they’re giving none away

Jimbo

This makes it absolutely clear, as Gleick puts it, that they are dealing with a well funded denialist machine accepting money from fossil fuel special interests. Healthcare = climate denial.

Garry Stotel

Futurama variation: “So, what makes a man turn skeptic? Is it lust for gold, power, money, or were you just born with a heart full of skepticism??”

That chart also explains the enthusiasm of various professional societies:
AAAS, NAS, APS, AGU, etc., etc., etc.
for promoting man made global warming a.k.a. climate change as dogma.

More Soylent Green!

This just tallies up the tax-payer funding of “Big Green Heat Climate-Government Complex,” and compares it to the private funding of Heartland. What about all the Big Oil money that goes to Green Peace, WWF, etc?

Ken Hall

So the somebody in the government needs to look at SACKING a lot of people, as they are clearly completely ineffective and very expensive.
The truth will outshine propaganda, no matter how much is spent!

Real Green

What’s a billion dollars a year . . . well it is a lot if you are a local environmentalist trying to sort your plastics.
http://tinyurl.com/89rq5da
The Transglobal Environmental Industry is the problem, not the solution.

Dave

There are other US federal government departments with global warming initiatives that are not shown on Josh’s graphic… these include the Departments of Defense, State, Transportation, Education, and Health & Human Services. I’m sure that further analysis would identitify other agencies as well…

reason

Clearly, Heartland is part of the Evil 1%.
(bottom 1%, but hey…don’t let details get in the way of a good protest!)

RockyRoad

The big-money-funded interests supporting the AGWCF cause must think Heartland is using its mere pittance to buy ear plugs, blindfolds, and mouth tape to keep all us skeptics in the dark.
They’re that clueless.

Jenn Oates

What a waste of my tax dollars.

Jimbo

We should have had another graph showing private funding for global warming alarmists. It’s worse than we thought!
Here is the global warming alarmist, The Sierra Club, secretly taking $26 million from the natural gas interests.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/science/earth/after-disclosure-of-sierra-clubs-gifts-from-gas-driller-a-roiling-debate.html
Here is the Climate Research Unit (CRU) acknowledging funding from oil, gas and nuclear power interests.
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/
Here’s Stanford Global Climate and Energy Project and Exxon funding to the tune of $100 million.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/21/us/exxon-led-group-is-giving-a-climate-grant-to-stanford.html
and so on………………..Follow the money folks – even dirty oil, nuclear and gas money. Heartland need not apply. ;>)

FerdinandAkin

The warmist solution to their public relations problem is contained right there in the chart. It is a well known fact that excess Government funding leads to waste, duplication of effort, and inefficiency. Over funding the people promoting Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming has left them to being defeated by the abysmally funded Heartland Institute.
To level the playing field, and assure victory for CAGW forces, the Government should immediately embark on a program to fund every possible aspect of skeptic ideas. If the skeptics receive an order of magnitude more funding than warmists receive, they will become lethargic and intoxicated to the point where CAGW triumph is assured. Conquest of the skeptics can only be achieved by over feeding them.

MarkW

John from CA says:
March 1, 2012 at 7:56 am
That would only make sense if there were govt funded agencies that were opposing the CAGW nonsense.
As such, it would make more sense to keep the govt funded agencies, and include with them the privatly funded agencies.

RockyRoad

Just proves one thing (and one thing only): The truth doesn’t need promotion.
Cheers to Heartland.
(Note: From my background in mining, “promotion” is about the dirtiest word imaginable as it always indicates misrepresentation and lack of merit.)

AJB

Robert Brown says @ March 1, 2012 at 7:36 am
UK pump prices in US terms:
Unleaded gasoline: $7.98 per US gallon
Diesel: $8.69 per US gallon
I’m guessing you’re paying around $3.50 and $4.00 respectively? Take a look at this to see what stacked up green lies can really do. Note that 60% of the pump price is tax. The rate of taxation is therefore actually 150%. Not many Ford Excursions over here!

Honest ABE

I love it.
The only thing I’d change is making the Heartland circle a half circle.

MarkW

Typhoon says:
March 1, 2012 at 8:05 am
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
~ Upton Sinclair

Which is funny, considering the fact that Sinclair was the Michael Mann of his day.

Jimbo

John from CA says:
March 1, 2012 at 7:56 am
It might make more sense to compare Heartland to other privately funded groups like Green Peace?
It’s still David V Goliath.
$238 million the World Wildlife
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/02/17/big-oil-money-for-me-but-not-for-thee/
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2010/06/04/bp-greenpeace-the-big-oil-jackpot/

Alan Clark of Dirty Oil-berta

As others have already touched upon, add the funding from the EU, the UN, stipends and grants from industry and organizations like GreenPeace and WWF and you have a multi-billion dollar annual cash pool that “ethical” scientists will lie, cheat and steal to gain and maintain access to.
Meanwhile, the children starve and die.

And that is just ONE government. Virtually every government is giving to the “cause”.

6.5 million on the side of private sector common sense is much more effective; NASA has some nice space pics though…

Chuck

John from CA says:
March 1, 2012 at 7:56 am
It might make more sense to compare Heartland to other privately funded groups like Green Peace?

I found some numbers on-line, not all very current, but you’ll get the idea.
From Wikipedia – Greenpeace worldwide 2008 – Income 196.6 million euros
Sierra Club 2008 Annual Report – Expenses $44,680,778
WWF Annual Report 2010 – Expenses $224,260,469

Claude Harvey

Anthony:
I think you could re-title your chart for use in economics. I suggest:
“A Comparison of the Effectiveness of GOVERNMENT MONEY and PRIVATE MONEY”

northernont

Goes to show you, telling the truth doesn’t cost much.

The National Resources Defense Council’s (NRDC) first item on it’s priorities page states-
http://www.nrdc.org/about/priorities.asp
“Curbing Global Warming and Creating the Clean Energy Future
Climate change is the single biggest environmental and humanitarian crisis of our time. The world must unite to combat this crisis, and our best weapon is clean energy. Renewable power, conservation, energy efficiency in buildings and elsewhere, more efficient vehicles and clean fuels-these are the solutions that will reduce the impacts on our climate, revive our economy, and create jobs. NRDC works to jumpstart the clean energy future not only here in America, but also in China, where we have worked on energy issues for more than a decade, and in India, where we have established a new program to promote clean energy policies.”
From their : Consolidated Statement of Activities for the Year Ending June 30, 2010
http://www.nrdc.org/about/annual/finances.pdf
Expenses:
Program services:
Clean energy future 39,603,135
Revive our oceans 5,227,114
Protect our health 5,471,254
Wild places and wildlife 18,700,417
Safe & suffcient water 5,267,350
Sustainable communities 3,993,228
Membership services 4,072,596 –
Total program services 82,335,094
one can tell that they are putting a lot of money towards their priorities. I recently came across a Blog post from NRDC that caught my attention as it was entitled “California’s Energy Policy Continues to Provide Valuable Lessons Going Forward” – http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/lettenson/californias_energy_policy_cont.html
I hope to get some clarification from the author of the post on this statement from the post-
“Californians pay 20% less on residential electricity bills than the average U.S. household.”
To come up with a total for NRDC’s advocacy efforts on climate change I would add the 39.6 million (clean energy future) +3.99 million (sustainable communities) to = $43.59 million.