As many WUWT readers know, I attended the AGU fall meeting and I have a number of posts coming up that will highlight many of the posters and sessions that I attended. I have some video interviews in the bag also that I’ll be posting. Right now, I’m playing catch up at work.
However, this bit of a surprise juxtaposition was sent to me by WUWT regular “Jabba the cat” and is worth highlighting, because I’m pretty sure that if skeptics had a conference with these sponsors, we’d be vociferously vilified with sponsors like these.
Those with high climate sensitivity should avert your eyes from the following image.
Don’t believe me?
Have a look for yourself: http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2013/general-information/thank-you-to-our-sponsors/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that an Omissions Trading Scheme would have more financial potential than anything tried heretofore.
It’s protection money. If there is catastrophic warming and it’s caused by CO2, Big Oil will be blamed. If they pay the piper now, it’s less likely they will be purged and end up in a death camp somewhere in Belgium.
Tainted! TAAAAAAAAAINTED!!!
bullocky: Yes. As I’ve said before, if the warmists really believe their predictions are so absolutely certain to be correct, they should establish a temperatures futures trading index and sell us poor skeptic fools steeply discounted (because remember, they’re really really really sure) options that we only have to pay if the predicted trend shows up in the satellite record.
Needless to say this suggestion has never been greeted with the appropriate paroxysms of joy, for much the same reason that the value of oceanfront property is not cratering.
Almost all the Big Oil companies have subsidiaries that make some coin on the stupid ‘green in our cronies pockets’ alternative energy subsidy scams. Not to mention that Big Oil are small potatoes comparied to the pockets of Uncle Sam.
At least 13 years ago I put on several blogs that “If the AGW computer models are as good as they claim, why aren’t they writing computer models for the stock market? Modeling the stock market would be much simpler.” Well, here it is 2013, and you see where there predictions have gone. If they had invested money based upon their predictions they would be BROKE. And, I just read that one solar company after another are going bankrupt in China,
…very comical… methane madness to replace coal hysteria..following the greenmail is correct!
Good point. We should raise the corporate tax rate and fully fund science through peer reviewed NSF grants. 😉
So what do you think would happen IF our side had a conference like that and we had the exact same sponsors?
Bob Diaz says: December 17, 2013 at 8:21 pm
So what do you think would happen IF our side had a conference like that and we had the exact same sponsors?
—————————————–
Well it would only happen if there was a quid pro quo, sponsors always have an agenda..what could skeptics offer as a return on their investment?
Anthony-san:
Helpful hint: Please remember that airlines have a 50 lbs carry-on-bag weight limit, and that $1 million in $100’s weighs about 21 lbs…
Please take this into consideration given all the $ millions the oil-company fairies undoubtedly left under your hotel bed pillow while you were attending the AGU conference……
Ciao, and have a safe trip home.
At the risk of being seen as a pedant I would like to point out a few facts about BP.
From the wikipedia page
That is British Petroleum no longer exists, BP is the company name for the past 12+ years.
I’ve noticed that Michael Mann and other warmists like to single out the “Koch machine” for attacks. With so many “evil” fossil-fuel companies around, I always wondered why they picked on the Koch brothers. Now I think I know. The rest are dutifully forking over protection money.
The problem is it won’t count. Big Oil paying the Catastrophists is just Big Oil “seeing the light” and coming over to the “right” side, realizing and admitting their sins, etc., etc., etc. It’s only if they pay the realists anything at all – even a dime – that they are castigated for sinning again. The Cause is everything to these people, they don’t care where the money comes from.
Does this mean that if all the invited speakers received any form of reimbursement they received “big oil money” ?
Other than the fact going postal is a really sad metaphor, I thought the Postal services could not exist without all their pieces of equipment relying on a large amount of big oil. (Ponies went out a few years ago).
RoHa, exactly!
Dan Toppins says:
I am curious why these companies provide sponorship for individuals/groups/conferences that oppose thier very existence?
Because the greenies express their opposition to the existence of petro companies by taking actions that greatly benefit the petro companies. Petro companies LOVE global warming hysteria more than greenies ever will. It has already handed them 50% of the US electricity generation market, and is working hard to give them the rest, by regulating coal out of existence.
Meanwhile, other hard working greenies are protecting petro companies from competition by keeping reliable nuclear and hydropower off the market, and keeping unreliable solar and wind schemes that require petro fueled back-up in their place.
What’s not to like about hateblind greenies? They do what you want, are extremely predictable, and are cheap to purchase. Sure, they are annoying and smell bad, but if you convince them to hate you, you don’t have to socialize with them.
Useful idiots.
Oops! That didn’t work. Want some oil or gas? The line forms to the right.
Where’s Gazprom? Scared away by Greenpeace?
Jimbo says:
December 17, 2013 at 4:11 pm
“Re/insurance plays an important role in managing climate and natural disaster risk, and that’s why it’s part of Swiss Re’s core business.
Natural disasters cost the global insurance industry around USD 77 billion in 2012, but the human toll was higher: according to the Swiss Re sigma publication “Natural catastrophes and man-made disasters in 2012,” 14,000 lives were lost.”
———————————————————————–
Hold it…
14,000 lost to natural and man made disasters
7,000,000,000 souls in the world
that’s 14 / 7,000,000 equals .0002%?
That’s all? I thought the human population had a CAGW problem?
cn
tom0mason says:
December 17, 2013 at 8:59 pm
A fact which Obama chose to ignore.
No surprise, these companies are the only ones doing real geophysics with bankable results. They basically invented the science. Like everything else of value, AGU has been hijacked by the back-to-the-caves, asterisked PhDs.
DaveS, you are quite correct and he did (as usual) have me shouting at the screen for this (and so many other of his errors). Of course Obama wouldn’t know that he’s incorrect but his trained minders should.
(http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/germany-addresses-problems-with-renewable-energy-subsidy-system-a-852549.html):
“… power-hungry industries receive generous subsidies – the country’s largest industrial consumers use some 18 percent of the electricity produced but pay only 0.3 percent of the extra costs generated by the mandated feed-in tariffs. German consumers have to COUGH UP the difference.”
…
On UNIDO website:
“STATOIL is an international energy company and is currently involved in three large CCS projects, one of which is the Sleipner platform field in the North Sea.”
…
(http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9040837&contentId=7074218):
“BP has been involved in CCS for more than 10 years, focusing on a continuing programme of research and technology development, as well as full-scale projects such as In Salah, Algeria, one of the few operating industrial-scale C02 storage facilities in the world.”
…
“SHELL is involved in a number of demonstration projects around the world, but GOVERNMENT SUPPORT IS NEEDED […] to allow CCS to become financially viable and widespread.”
“Chevron is leading the Gorgon project, with Shell and ExxonMobil as partners [!!!]. Gorgon is the world’s largest CCS project.”
“In September 2012 Shell and partners made the final decision to begin construction, with $865 million [!!!] in funding from the governments […] of Alberta and Canada to support the project.”
( http://www.shell.com/global/environment-society/environment/climate-change/ccs/shell-ccs.html).
…
CAGW theory does not reduce the extraction of fossil fuels, but only raise their prices – profits oil and gas and coal companies.
Can additionally earn big money for CCS. CAGW also for the fossil fuels companies is: “business as usual …”