Is Bill McKibben @350 a liar, idiot, or both?

This is the sort of stuff that just makes you want to scream.

From Oil Sands Fact Check, comes this interview with Bill McKibben: http://oilsandsfactcheck.org/2014/09/25/video-the-truth-about-the-anti-keystone-xl-rockefeller-brothers-fund/

Excerpt:

Timed to coincide with the anti-fossil fuel march in New York City over the weekend, the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation (RBF) led a press conference of groups announcing a pledge to divest from fossil fuels. Given that board members of RBF are heirs to the Rockefeller oil fortune, the media was led to believe that divestment from fossil fuels was a drastic change in practice for the foundation. Yet anyone who knows the least bit about RBF is well aware that foundation has given millions to groups that oppose fossil fuels for years.

In fact, RBF is credited for providing the financial support to launch 350.org. How do we know that? Because Bill McKibben himself reluctantly gave away those details in a little-watched YouTube video (full version of interview here) from three years ago with a news outlet called Climate Challenge.

 From the transcript:

Climate Challenge: So you don’t get money from Pew or Rockefeller or any of those big foundations?

McKibben: No we did. Rockefellers Brothers fund gave us some money right when we were starting out that’s been useful too.

Climate Challenge: But they no longer fund you?

McKibben: Uhh I don’t know. I don’t have that sort of… funders sitting in front of me.

Climate Challenge: Really? That’s usually something that people know.

McKibben: Rockefellers is one of our… is a great ally in this fight.

So now the question becomes just how much money has RBF pumped into 350.org over the years? Vivian Krause, writing in the Financial Post looked into that early last year and found the number to be in the millions. In a piece out just today, Ron Arnold digs into the actual investments.  No wonder McKibben was reluctant to divulge the information.

====================================================================================================

And here, in plain public view, with an easy to find simple search, is the answer to Bill McKibben’s “Uhh I don’t know.” moment.

350-funded-by-RBFh/t to Vivian Krause via Twitter

0 0 votes
Article Rating
118 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
bwdave
September 29, 2014 4:16 pm

Yes.

MattS
Reply to  bwdave
September 29, 2014 9:56 pm

Winner!

Jimbo
Reply to  MattS
September 30, 2014 1:57 am

Bill McKibben sounded unsure. His website IS SURE.

In addition to individual donations, 350.org’s work in Fiscal Year 2012 was supported by the following foundations:……..
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Rockefeller Family Fund………..
http://350.org/about/financials/

Jimbo
Reply to  MattS
September 30, 2014 2:01 am

Same thing in 2013

In addition to individual donations, 350.org’s work in Fiscal Year 2013 was supported by the following foundations……….
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Rockefeller Family Fund
Scherman Foundation………
http://350.org/about/2013-annual-report/

Jimbo
Reply to  MattS
September 30, 2014 2:11 am

In addition to individual donations, 350.org’s work in Fiscal Year 2013 was supported by the following foundations…….
Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment……
http://350.org/about/2013-annual-report/

Who set up the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment? Jeremy Grantham who set up Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co. LLC. What does this investment outfit invest in? Many things as well as oil, coal, and natural gas exploration and distribution companies.

bonanzapilot
Reply to  MattS
September 30, 2014 8:02 am

All U.S. nonprofits are required to file and make public an IRS Form 990 after the close of each fiscal year. The 2012 FY ended September 30, 2013. The 2013 FY ends today.
So the latest available is for 2012. Expect the 2013 990 to appear around next June.
The reason the reports are public is that the taxpayers, by virtue of its tax-exempt status, essentially “own” the nonprofit and are expected to watch over it. Unfortunately they rarely do.
http://350.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/350.org-FY13-990-Public-Disclosure-Copy.pdf

Kurt in Switzerland
Reply to  bwdave
September 30, 2014 2:40 am

Not that I disagree with you, but since the linked interview was from 2011, shouldn’t the data on contributions to 350.org be prior to 2011?
Kurt in Switzerland

Jimbo
Reply to  Kurt in Switzerland
September 30, 2014 3:47 am

Hi Kurt,
I didn’t know the interview was from 2011. I looked at the youtube and it was posted up on Mar 4, 2014. Anyway, McKibben said in the video the Rockefeller Foundation gave them money right when they started which was in 2007. And we know the foundation also gave them money in 2012, 2013 and 2014. Therefore we have a gap of 4 years. My guess here is they continued to give. I’ll try and dig after my morning chores.

Jimbo
Reply to  Kurt in Switzerland
September 30, 2014 4:49 am

Sustainable Markets Foundation
$100,000 for 1 year
For its 350.org project.
Program: Sustainable Development
Award Date: 06/17/2010
Sustainable Markets Foundation
$75,000 for 1 year
For its project 350.org.
Program: Sustainable Development
Award Date: 11/07/2009

Jimbo
Reply to  Kurt in Switzerland
September 30, 2014 4:51 am

Kurt,
Here are the search results for my last post. 2009 and 2010 funding received by 350.org
http://tinyurl.com/nzzj2gq

Kurt in Switzerland
Reply to  Kurt in Switzerland
September 30, 2014 7:16 am

Jimbo –
Thanks; also for comments further down. It would be appropriate for Anthony Watts to update the posting with a list of contributions PRECEDING the interview.
Ideal would be for McKibben to make a guest posting at WUWT, explaining the organisation, its funding and its plans (and inviting questions from interested parties).
Kurt in Switzerland

garymount
September 29, 2014 4:17 pm

I was hoping there was going to be a poll to go along with this headline 🙂

Reply to  garymount
September 29, 2014 7:09 pm

I’m going with “all of the above”.

Reply to  JohnWho
September 30, 2014 4:01 am

I think it’s (a) because of (b).

Reply to  garymount
October 1, 2014 7:30 am

Well we already know for sure that he is stupid, we have overwhelming evidence of that, so the only question is is he a liar also, I say yes.

LogosWrench
September 29, 2014 4:22 pm

In other words 350.org is funded by big oil.
Hilarious!

Reply to  LogosWrench
September 29, 2014 8:59 pm

John D. Rockefeller made money by providing a commodity that helped to transform civilization, and along with coal and natural gas made possible the enormous progress in health, longevity, and material wealth for the average citizen of the West over the last 150 years or so. His heirs would turn progress on its head, trading cheap, plentiful energy and world development for some misguided notion of ‘sustainability’ and a vision of the future that would turn us all back to plowing with bullocks and using the dung for fuel. ‘Decency’? I call it shameful.
/Mr Lynn

sinewave
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 29, 2014 9:14 pm

Give us a break. Everyone screams that skeptics are paid shills of big oil, but all the big money funding the anti CO2 movement is for a noble cause, right.

shano
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 29, 2014 9:14 pm

This neighbourhood values truth and good science. What looks like decency appears misguided.

RockyRoad
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 29, 2014 9:19 pm

But 350.org is no longer funded by “Big Oil” if RBF divests themselves of their small remaining amounts of oil interests.
For the Rockefellers to fund such a group shows just how nefarious they were, and to gain political advantage by making this token divestiture shows they haven’t repented.
Shame on the Rockerfellers. Shame, shame, shame.

Walt Allensworth
Reply to  RockyRoad
September 30, 2014 10:16 am

So do you think if they sell all of their oil interests and put the money into “green” interests that this will change the fact that the fortune came from big oil?
Anyone?
Bueller?

David Yaussy
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 12:58 am

Jay Rockefeller isn’t running for reelection because he couldn’t beat Shelley Moore Capito. There was nothing noble about it.

Jimbo
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 1:18 am

There are many oil funded green bodies. Ya see it’s OK for them to take oil money, but it’s not OK for CAGW sceptics. Even some like Dana Nuccitelli – Guardian environmental contributor works for Tetra Tech oil and gas services company while telling us we must move away from fossil fuel use. It’s worse than we thought!

Jimbo
Reply to  Jimbo
September 30, 2014 1:27 am

Here is another.
Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co. LLC has investments in oil, coal, and natural gas exploration and distribution companies. It was set up by the environmentalist and hedge funder Jeremy Grantham.
The recipients of funding from the Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment (founded by Jeremy Grantham) includes the London School of Economics: Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
It’s worse than we thought.

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
Reply to  Jimbo
September 30, 2014 3:05 am

methinks petey grace is another nick stokes.

David Smith
Reply to  Jimbo
September 30, 2014 3:15 am

@PG
“Where is the financial benefit to those donors?”
Have you not heard of ‘greenwashing’ Peter? These companies give money to green NGOs to make themselves look worthy and cuddly in the eyes of the average gullible greenie/watermelon

Reply to  Jimbo
October 1, 2014 3:11 am

How clean is our ‘dirty’ oil? You’d be surprised. by Peter Burn, former senior advisor in the Greenhouse Gas Reductions Directorate in Environment Canada, and advisor to Environment Minister Jim Prentice. (July 2014)

Researchers for California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard have recently released new data measuring the carbon intensity of various crude oil blends, including diluted bitumen (a.k.a. ‘dilbit’) and upgraded synthetic crude oil (‘SCO’) from the Canadian oilsands. The Californian findings will not be well-received by anti-oilsands activists.
Among the findings that may surprise:
• There are 13 oil fields in California, plus crude oil blends originating in at least six other countries, that generate a higher level of upstream greenhouse gas emissions than Canadian dilbit blends;
• Crude oil from Alaska’s North Slope, which makes up about 12 per cent of California’s total crude slate, is actually “dirtier” than the Canadian dilbit known as “Access Western Blend”;
• The “dirtiest oil in North America” is not produced in Canada, but just outside Los Angeles, where the Placerita oil field generates about twice the level of upstream emissions as Canadian oilsands production; and
• The title of “world’s dirtiest oil” goes to Brass crude blend from Nigeria, where the uncontrolled release of methane during the oil extraction process generates upstream GHG emissions that are over four times higher than Canadian dilbit.

JB Goode
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 1:30 am

‘The Rockefeller’s interest is driven by decency and that drive appears to be incomprehensible to this neighbourhood’
What is McKibben’s interest driven by when he won’t answer a straight question?
Ok sorry,I am not a climate scientist and have never had a peer reviewed paper published so I withdraw the question.

Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 1:34 am

I imagine the Rockefellers are haunted by some sort of guilt about their gains being ill-gotten. People who have worked hard for a living can’t imagine the warped brains of people who haven’t worked so hard, or who gained their wealth by some means that are unjust.
There is a great scene in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” where Claudius is attempting to pray for forgiveness, (after killing his brother for his brother’s crown and wife,) and says,
“My fault is past. But, O, what form of prayer
Can serve my turn? ‘Forgive me my foul murder’?
That cannot be; since I am still possess’d
Of those effects for which I did the murder-
My crown, mine own ambition, and my queen.
May one be pardon’d and retain the offence?”
Perhaps the most annoying attribute of the rich and spoiled is their tendency to ask others to sacrifice, as they keep their wealth. (For example, the rich lady stuffing bonbons into her face while blubbering into Kleenex as she watches a PBS show about the poor and hungry in Africa. She gets a sort of pleasure from crying for the poor, but never gets around to feeding the poor….or, for that matter, dieting.)

Reply to  Caleb
October 1, 2014 7:13 am

The Rockefellers inherited their money. So if they see it as “ill gained” that makes them “ill gained”. They gained it by virtue of birth.

Konrad.
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 2:28 am

Peter,
there is no point throwing “weepy bill” under the bus, you and yours are permanently chained to that squealing warmulonian, so down you go. If you wanted to get some “cred” from denouncing McKribben, you should have been very loud and clear over a decade ago. It’s too late now…
You think you are achieving “push back” at WUWT? Sure, there many are lukewarmers who believe adding radiative gases to the atmosphere will reduce surface and atmospheric radiative cooling ability. But some here are real sceptics. We know the 255K assumption is in grave error. We know AGW due to CO2 is a physical impossibility. I have the empirical experiments to back my claims. “Push back” as hard as you like sunshine, it can never work. 😉
“But, but, hard sceptics are not “pal-reviewed!” I hear you screech. Here’s the thing Peter, I have been pressured to submit to several journals, and my answer is always “NO”. *
Why not? Well, it can now be shown that the empirical dis-proof of Gorebull Warbling was demonstrated in the public domain before the journals. Pal-review is scientific bureaucracy, not scientific method. Its easy hijack should be an embarrassment to all thinking scientists. I intend to rub that message in good and hard. Real hard.
Hard sceptics are not just after the end of the AGW hoax, we are gunning for the (non) scientific bureaucracy that allowed it to flourish. Real sceptics are going to destroy any hope of the professional left playing dress-ups in the white coat of scientific respectability from now until the heat death of the universe.
So what ave you achieved with your “push back” Peter? Nothing but exposing the vacuity of the warmulonians and the professional left. Remember, up the tracks, not across Peter.
*Ok, someone slipped up. Some of my old 2011 experiments were published without my knowledge, or prior approval, in a peer reviewed paper. It wasn’t me, so my plan remains solid.

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 3:04 am

Say petey, did you shut off your fossil-fueled heating this past winter?

John W. Garrett
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 3:22 am

The hypocrisy of limousine liberals is beyond the pale.
There sits Eileen Rockefeller playing organic “farmer” in Vermont doing a fair imitation of a trust-fund hippie. Many in the family’s 4th generation are completely removed from reality.

Jbird
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 7:17 am

The Rockefellers and their ilk are not interested in saving the planet for anyone but themselves. Their efforts are now, and always have been, geared toward the complete domination of governments and human beings. They see representative government as messy and much less manageable than totalitarian control. People like you, Peety, are their “useful idiots.”

mjc
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 8:55 am

Jay knew that he would lose…that’s why he quit. People in WV are a little ticked off with his voting record as of late and without “Porkbarrel” Byrd to partner with Jay was not going to win another round…nothing to do with coal, oil or the environment.

Roger D, P. Geol
Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 2:42 pm

Peter, just a load of unsubstantiated BS. The family “knows”?! BS Another set of “born again” anti-development billionaires buying indulgences at the altar of CAGW, having made their billions and now leaving the majority of the earth’s population to wallow in energy poverty because they “know”!

Reply to  LogosWrench
September 30, 2014 4:13 pm

Powering industry, heating and cooling homes, turning on the lights, and transporting mankind via the internal-combustion engine “will damage the speciies”? Where do such antediluvian thoughts come from?

Reply to  LogosWrench
October 1, 2014 7:53 am

Who consistently vote against coal. In every vote, Manchin has voted with Obama, even when he whines about having to. So the question becomes, how stupid are the people of West Virginia?
We will find out in November.

Richard Howes
September 29, 2014 4:24 pm

both

PiperPaul
September 29, 2014 4:25 pm

Search Results were limited to 5. Could there be more?

zootcadillac
Reply to  PiperPaul
September 30, 2014 3:20 am

There are only 5 results if you widen the search.

Randy K
September 29, 2014 4:28 pm

Wonder why he was too scared to admit to the truth.

mpainter
Reply to  Randy K
September 29, 2014 4:37 pm

Because the Rockefeller fortune was oil – in fact, a monopoly on oil and the old Standard Oil Company was one of the first monopolies to be busted up under the law. So now McKibben is a “shill” for the Rockefeller interests. A paid shill.

rogerknights
Reply to  Randy K
September 30, 2014 5:45 pm

Probably he was worried that smaller donors would feel less motivated to contribute if they knew that 350.org had big-money backing.

Admin
September 29, 2014 4:31 pm

Receiving funding from the Rockefellers is not necessarily something to be proud of. They have funded some rather unfortunate causes in their time.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 29, 2014 4:39 pm

I think that Eugenics is something the progressives would like to forget much like the warmists would like to forget the other warming periods during the Holocene. Both items are bad for the image don’t ya know.
In fact, in many ways the present warm-mongering by the progressives is a continuations of their efforts to “purify” mankind. (their vision of mankind at least) The fact that they corrupted science in furtherance of their aims should surprise no one as science has always been for sale.

TYoke
Reply to  markstoval
September 29, 2014 6:16 pm

Eugenics is sure not the only one.
The big one is the long support of the left for state socialism in the 20th century. State socialism killed 100 million and enslaved billions.
Then of course there is the internment of the Japanese by FDR, and the long support of Jim Crow policies by the “party of the little people”.
The common element is the use of big government to force coercive solutions.

MangoChutney
Reply to  markstoval
September 30, 2014 12:28 am

Eugenics continues in the guise of the Club of Rome. The elite are allowed to breed, but, if CoR had their way, the rest of us wouldn’t breed. Why else would they advocate population control without leading by example?

Barbara
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 29, 2014 8:19 pm

Earth Charter Initiative
North American Commissioners:
Maurice F. Strong, Canada
John Hoyt, U.S.
Elizabeth May, Canada
Steven C. Rockefeller, U.S.
Severn Cullis Suzuki, Canada
http://www.earthinaction.org/content > Who And What > Commissioners

climatebeagle
September 29, 2014 4:31 pm

Rockerfeller was 350.org’s 2nd largest single donor in 2012, probably hard for a president to remember the second largest, if only they had given $300,001!
http://threefifty2pt0.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/fy2012_350.org_form_990_public_disclosure_copy.pdf

dp
September 29, 2014 4:33 pm

If you are asking for an opinion then yes to all three and I would toss in misinformed and irresponsible as well. If you want solid facts the answer is nobody knows. We do know that carbon deniers kill people with the kiss of progressive global concern. Carbon deniers in this case being those who deny passage of so-called death trains carrying coal to market and who deny cheap fossil fuel powered electrical energy to starving populations in large parts of the world. It is not limited to the third-world. How many more elderly Brits must die from the bitter cold each winter because of misbegotten green energy policies advocated by these carbon deniers? How long before society does the right thing by putting them behind bars?

Col Klink
September 29, 2014 4:39 pm

The Rockefellers are a brainless familiy that has spent a lot trying to atone for their antecedent’s bad deeds. Nelson was as stupid as they come.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Col Klink
September 29, 2014 6:09 pm

Antecedants perhaps were not so brainless. It’s always easy to criticize some historic character out of context for the age he lived in. It’s fashionable in this age of homogenization to put Sir Isaac Newton down because he was so religious and because he dabbled in alchemy (chemistry wasn’t yet available for dabbling in the 17th Century). I’m sure your forbears and mine believed in witches, magic, slavery, demons….Progressives are like termites demolishing a palace. PC has banned Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, Shakespeare, from schools etc. for being insensitive to our minorities. Actually Mark Twain was more empathetic toward the plight of slaves than most Americans in the mid 19th century. Oh yes, he used the “N” word, which is actually an American mispronunciation of the Portuguese word “negro” which means simply black, the color. The Portuguese were the main slave traders bringing Africans to the Americas. Yes, I realize that in time and context it took on a pejorative meaning and I understand that. But to rewrite history and ban the world’s literature and art to clean it up is really a way to polish the image of European descendants.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 29, 2014 7:02 pm

You reminded me of this cartoon. And I was also reminded of a DVD set my uncle bought of award winning Tom and Jerry/Looney Tunes cartoons. When you put the DVD in, there was a disclaimer about how insensitive and wrong some attitudes of the cartoons were.
But what annoys me about the leftist mindest is their hypocrisy and double-standard. It is wrong to use the “N word”; it is not wrong to call someone a cracker. It is wrong to use oil; it is not wrong to profit from someone who made their fortune from oil. It is wrong for poor countries to use cheap coal; it is not wrong for me to own several large houses but still live on an always moving yacht. And I could go on. The “rules for me and rules for thee” hypocrisy is what disgusts me most of all.

Streetcred
Reply to  Gary Pearse
September 29, 2014 7:02 pm

Behind the slave trading were the Arabs and Africans themselves. It would seem that slave trading in Arab states is still quite fashionable … just ask the Indian contract construction workers who go to Dubai to make a crust. I was only the other day talking to a foreign national who went to work in Dubai on contract … only to find that the ‘deal’ once you arrived there was nowhere near what the ‘offer’ provided in the employment contract. If you resign and leave, you are billed the cost to get you there and you are physically held there until it is paid. Alternatively, the best way to get out is to sit back, feet up, until you get dismissed at which time they are required to repatriate you to your country of origin.

Reply to  Col Klink
October 1, 2014 7:40 am

I never cared for Nelson, but I don’t think John D. Rockefeller Sr, lived a fine life, he was not evil.

ossqss
September 29, 2014 4:40 pm

Amazing hypocrisy!
You can’t make this stuff up.
One wonders how that makes his following feel……..or if they even have the ability to process the thought in context.

David Ball
September 29, 2014 4:42 pm

Steyer, Soros, Rockefeller, etc. I just threw up in my mouth a little. It seems that we should change from the term “hockey team” to “projectionists”.

CodeTech
Reply to  David Ball
September 29, 2014 5:21 pm

What we are observing is more along the lines of a puppet show.

Dave
September 29, 2014 4:44 pm

“McKibben: Rockefellers is one of our… is a great ally in this fight.”
Maybe weepy Bill is using Bill Clinton’s definition of “is”.

Alx
September 29, 2014 4:48 pm

Stupid or evil. Whats the difference if it leads to the same outcome.

September 29, 2014 5:02 pm

For the last 39 years, yes since the last time before present the persons and group beloning to the AWG-group put forward their thesis re. CO2, I have been saying: Follow the money.
adding the question: “Where have all the money gone?
And now
when some followed the money so we know where they came from,
we still don’t know where the money gone.
There are so much money “placed” by investors who want the AWG-believers to be believed to be true,
that neither Theories of Science is on the agenda before a paper of those believers are presented,
nor do we know how much of the pre-view paper’s writers, editors and other have had of said money,
nor do we know how much of the money gone into other pockets not associated with science at all, neither with so called science or real sound science….

David Chappell
Reply to  norah4you
September 30, 2014 7:44 am

Well, I guess a lot of the money will have gone to airlines and 5* hotels.

Alternative News Now
September 29, 2014 5:03 pm

Reblogged this on Canadian Climate Guy and commented:
Busted!

del boy
September 29, 2014 5:06 pm

So old scary eyes Mckibben gets $800.000 given to him over 5 years and he comes up with uhh I don’t no, I have not got the info in front of me.Despicable liar on this subject and his so called global warming crap.What I cannot believe is how the rockerfellers are taken in by this fool.

Reply to  del boy
September 29, 2014 5:48 pm

Taken in? The Rockefellers fund whatever cements political power in governments instead of individuals. From Metropolitanism to Green Energy Deliberative Democracy via Dialogue to the Club of Rome. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/experimenting-on-people-and-places-via-the-rockefeller-process-of-communication-for-social-change/ makes it quite clear too that the Rockefeller philanthropies have pushed other foundations to follow whatever their lead is and not contradict the message.
McKibben would be aware of just how coordinated this all is. Last year was the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the original foundation. You can download the lovely book created that openly brags about their pushes involving social engineering.

whiten
Reply to  del boy
September 30, 2014 2:37 pm

@del boy
What I cannot believe is how the rockerfellers are taken in by this fool.
——————–
You could be right… but I think it will be childish to consider a wealthy and a powerful entity of such a magnitude as foolish.
I call it an entity… as regardless of the name, it stands and operates in regard to it’s power and wealth status…….
It will do anything to protect its interest.
One of main priorities is to get the best information the “silver” can “grab”, especially while its own interest at stake.
What do you think the best information on climate change could be!
Could it be nearly the same you know these days [decelerated warming,hiatus, very little warming, close to a no existent AGW.. etc.] …….!
But getting at it about a decade earlier in advance….makes that information very important and priceless while the interest related to it is in question!
If you know that chances of this global warming or the AGW are next to none and destined to crash, and if it helped you to protect your interest by making it fly higher and higher before crashing!…[Icarus “effect”]…….
wouldn’t you think this as the most effective way to be done with it once and for all, without any chance of the threat coming back to you in any other form or shape .
Paying for organisations and to people like Mc Kibben can and does help in that regard. There always spineless characters ready to play the fool and the idiot for few more dollars and a little publicity.
Global warming and the AGW are not the real threat in such cases of big oil or whatever.
The CO2 emissions seem to be the real threat.
Making and helping the AGW to crash as loudly as possible will deafen any other threatening problems about CO2 emissions..
I don’t know any Rockfellers individually to be good or bad, clever or fools… as far as I can tell any one of them, or anyone in their possition could be as good and bright as it can get…….but still I think none owns such wealth and power… but incontrary that kind of wealth and power owns them.
cheers

Rob Dawg
September 29, 2014 5:07 pm

Someone should inform the independent auditors of the Rockefeller Foundation that one of their recipients is not keeping accurate donor records and should be dropped from the grants list.

michael hart
September 29, 2014 5:11 pm

350, 400, 450, whatever.

September 29, 2014 5:15 pm

& Naomi Oreskes in her capacity as the GMMPSPHMCCC*** should be informed immediately that we found out that it looks like McKibben is a double agent in the CAGW team being paid by both big oil and by green NGOs.
*** GMMPSPHMCCC means the Grim Mistress of the Ministry of Public Safety for the Protection of the Heroic Mythology of the Climate Change Cause’
John

Johna Till Johnson
September 29, 2014 5:17 pm

And how many times has McKibben parroted that line about how “all deniers are funded by big oil”?
Anthony, where’s YOUR $800,000?
Hypocrites.
Not the word I would have used, but I understand this is a family-centered blog.

Steve Oregon
September 29, 2014 5:19 pm

Nice climate movement. A bunch of sleazy characters and connivers in cahoots.

Sam Hall
September 29, 2014 5:27 pm

Divesting from fossil fuels is a image move, it doesn’t have any real effect. For example, Exxon Mobil traded over 14 million shares today with a value of 1.4 billion And Rockefeller isn’t listed a major holder.

Michael Wassil
September 29, 2014 5:30 pm

We expected what? Honesty? Integrity?

September 29, 2014 5:39 pm

Bill McKibben is what he’s paid to be.
Exactly who and what might be interesting to find out.
But really, does what he does and says really matter much anymore? He’s cheaper than a real PR campaign. And his backers would be hard pressed to convince media outlets to run anti-global warming messages as Public Service Announcements, “fossil” energy companies are paying ad customers.
McKibben is an inexpensive “motivated advocate acting in the best interest of the public”. He provides a face and voice as a tireless fighter for the greater good.
About the greatest thing you can fault him for is not clearly announcing if he is or is not a card-carrying member of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). Although in 2013 he was with his fellow celebrities at the 23rd Annual Environmental Media Awards when he picked up the EMA Lifetime Achievement Award (last link has the pic). Maybe someone could give his rep a buzz and check.

Mandobob
September 29, 2014 5:41 pm

Why the hell anyone would give those (read Him) idiots $800K. Fools and their money are soon parted. Oh, and He is both.

Admin
Reply to  Mandobob
September 29, 2014 5:56 pm

In my opinion, the Rockefellers think they are buying insurance. A few hundred thousand is a cheap price to pay, for buying the “friendship” of a demagogue who has demonstrated the ability to mobilise large numbers, who could conceivably one day be in a position to threaten that vast wealth, however remote that possibility seems today.

JB Goode
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 30, 2014 1:48 am

Yeah really Peter,or have you got a better reason why Mckibben won’t answer a straight question?
Just because he’s a bug eyed crank doesn’t mean he’s stupid.

Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter)
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 30, 2014 3:37 am

Yo, petey grace! Are you really That naïve?

jmorpuss
September 29, 2014 5:51 pm

All Americans should read about this family. http://educate-yourself.org/ga/RFcontents.shtml

DirkH
Reply to  jmorpuss
September 30, 2014 3:43 am

And watch this.

September 29, 2014 5:56 pm

Just an ordinary bad liar. McKibben is afflicted with not being a victim.

September 29, 2014 6:14 pm

& well live and learn. Today I learned the plausibility of using the words ‘McKibben’ and ‘mercenary’ is the same sentence.
John

jmorpuss
September 29, 2014 6:15 pm
H.R.
September 29, 2014 6:24 pm

wOw! That’s a lot of scratch!
I’m in the wrong business. Why oh why did I pick engineering? I’m the one who should be weeping, not Bill.

September 29, 2014 6:34 pm

That is a serious question?
All of the above has been obvious since he first sought notoriety with his sleazy,weepy act.
Of course he is all of the above, he is a self confessed progressive.
Follow the money.
Thanks Vivian, keep pounding them.

September 29, 2014 7:00 pm

Both, but, who cares?
There is no way to change a paid opinion.

Frank K.
September 29, 2014 7:13 pm

Well, tis the season as they say. I mean what’s a warmist to do? This year’s arctic death spiral was a big bust. And the antarctic sea ice extent continues to make records. The satellites are diverging rapidly from the heavily “adjusted” GHCN temperatures. Trenberth still can’t find his missing heat. The super El Nino bombed. No hurricanes in the Atlantic. Tornadoes are down. There’s flooding in the southwest where there should be drought. Temperatures everywhere are near normal. And a cold winter is coming.
So what does a good warmist do?
“Keystone pipeline! Bad! Earth is gonna fry if we build it! AIEEEEEE.” 🙂

spdrdr
September 29, 2014 7:46 pm

Wasn’t Creepy “Tick! Tick! Tick!” Bill photographed recently with his grocery trolley filled with PLASTIC bags?

Jon P
September 29, 2014 8:02 pm

John Mashey to do an in depth analysis of this despicable Big Oil funding in 3.2.1.. never.

hunter
September 29, 2014 8:07 pm

Don’t forget that he is also a kook with a long term identity crisis that at one time led him to pretend he was a native American so he could feel better about himself. All he seems to have gotten out of his identity fraud is to conclude he should be a parasite running a faux NGO that does nothing to actually help people – except himself and his staff, of course.
McKibben represents the worst sort of person in a civilized society: The whiny deceitful parasite who be-clowns himself selling doom and gloom to the wealthy for their pity money. The next downward step would take him into violence and terror. But McKibben is too cowardly for that.

Charles Nelson
September 29, 2014 8:37 pm

You know I’m thinking maybe Weepy Bill won’t get quite as much dough during the next round of awards. These Philanthropical Funds give money to be ‘loved’ not ‘laughed at’!

Joe Prins
September 29, 2014 9:06 pm

Let’ s play with some “ifs”. Top ten oil companies’ market value: around 1 trillion U.S. dollars. Exxon alone is abou $ 422 B. So if 800 investors divest themselves of 50 billion over 5 years, who will notice? Not counting coal or natural gas what is the impact on globule warming? Besides, there are also things like ETFs.
And since the reporting is done quarterly, one still have can be almost fully invested in oil except for report week.
Or set up a subsidiary to hide the holdings. Or out of country, after all, oil companies are global.

joelobryan
September 29, 2014 9:56 pm

I am still waiting for those Big Oil and Koch Bros checks to show up in my mailbox for my 5 years of criticizing AGW and progressives (mostly on news site comments).
waiting…… sigh. w
Well CAGW is such a lie, the future UN Climate Truth police will have a 2nd Amendment supporter to deal with when they come for me.

Non Nomen
September 29, 2014 10:47 pm

Is Bill McKibben a paid liar, idiot or both?
Bill McKibben Honored with “Alternative Nobel” Prize
Incredible!
“The former National Security Agency contractor[Edward Snowden] split the honorary portion of the 2014 Right Livelihood Award with Alan Rusbridger, editor of British newspaper The Guardian, which has published a series of articles on government surveillance based on documents leaked by Snowden.
The 1.5 million kronor ($210,000) cash award was shared by Pakistani human rights activist Asma Jahangir, Basil Fernando of the Asian Human Rights Commission and U.S. environmentalist Bill McKibben.
…”
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/snowden-honored-alternative-nobel-25722895
*bold mine*

DirkH
Reply to  Non Nomen
September 30, 2014 3:16 am

Look into who founded the Alternative Nobel Prize and especially the biography of the guys father. It is rather, ahem, colorful.

Berényi Péter
September 29, 2014 11:19 pm

Rockefellers are no fools. If nothing else, they do know perfectly well how markets work. If you restrict supply and make new investment into alternatives like coal or nuclear impossible, prices go up.
More profits can be made at twice the price than by doubling production, because that way lots of investment can be saved. It is as simple as that.

Kurt in Switzerland
September 29, 2014 11:48 pm

Since the interview was made in 2011, one needs to investigate donations up to 2010 (not post-2010)! I’d be interested to learn more about the Rasmussen Foundation.

Jimbo
September 30, 2014 1:47 am

It’s not only 350.org’s funding we should look at. Just look at their global tours by plane instead of teleconferencing.

“Now the tour is going global — first to Australia, then to New Zealand, Fiji, and beyond!”
http://maths.350.org
==========
May 29, 2013?
Australia and New Zealand: The New Frontiers of Divestment and Maths
Bill is about to start a two week tour of Australia, New Zealand and Fiji, bringing his Do the Maths message Downunder. Before he even lands in Australia, the Australian Coal Association has come out biting at his ankles……
http://350.org/australia-and-new-zealand-new-frontiers-divestment-and-maths/

Twobob
September 30, 2014 2:14 am

Cheats, Liars< lawyers, Politicians, McKibben

Jimbo
September 30, 2014 2:26 am

350.ORG
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
For the Year Ended September 30, 2013
(With Summarized Financial Information for the Year Ended September 30, 2012)
REVENUE
Grants and contributions ………2013 Total…
…$ 6,332,569…
http://350.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/350.org-2013-audit.pdf

H.R.
Reply to  Jimbo
September 30, 2014 8:05 am

Now I’m really weeping!

willnitschke
September 30, 2014 2:33 am

Long before I knew that Bill McKibben had anything to do with global warming activism, I listened to him on a podcast produced by Scientific American. The topic wasn’t climate related. Bill was rambling, boring and largely incoherent. After the 15 minutes was over I was left wondering why that had bothered to give this obvious nitwit a voice?

Gaz
September 30, 2014 2:41 am

Nothing like being caught with your pants down. This has probably been mentioned elsewhere, but I couldn’t help noticing in the “Grants search” for each funding, the stated project was “Sustainable Development”. Isn’t that Agenda 21?

DirkH
Reply to  Gaz
September 30, 2014 3:31 am

Sure it is. David Rockefeller is globalist #1.

David Ball
Reply to  DirkH
September 30, 2014 3:47 pm

Elizabeth May (leader of Canada’s Green Party) claims that Agenda 21 was dropped long ago.

DirkH
September 30, 2014 3:30 am

Controlling the Warmist NGO’s with a few 100K USD a year is surely a good investment for a billionaire. Rockefeller was never a coal billionaire; so just ensure coal goes down and oil goes up. I’m talking about THE Rockefeller; David; whether the other Rockefellers are nitwits is not important.

September 30, 2014 4:05 am

Let´s face it, this climate warming issue is becoming a political hot potato. We would have to be very naive to expect the large scale efforts such as 350.org are only grassroots efforts. What I would love to know if whether some of these campaigns are funded by Chinese solar panel makers. Or whether the European anti fracking movement is really financed by Gazprom. That would be kinda funny, wouldn´t it?

Barbara
Reply to  Fernando Leanme
September 30, 2014 8:15 pm

Maybe Maurice Strong acts as an agent of the Chinese government? Shut down U.S. industry and shift it to China?

c1ue
September 30, 2014 4:52 am

350.org : Connect the Dolts

Clovis Marcus
September 30, 2014 9:27 am

A good interviewer would have had the numbers ready before he asked the question.
A good interviewer is like a good lawyer. Never ask a question you don’t already have the answer to.

September 30, 2014 11:39 am

Rockefeller’s support of “All Things Billy” began in 2008 with McKibben’s involvement with Step It Up – http://www.rbf.org/grants_grantees/search/results?tid=All&field_grant_amount_value%5Brange%5D=&date_filter%5Bmin%5D%5Byear%5D=&date_filter%5Bmax%5D%5Byear%5D=&keys=350&sort_by=field_grant_award_date_value&sort_order=DESC&items_per_page=5 . Funny that Bill had difficulty recalling his then four-year, six-figure sugar daddy during the December 2011 Climate Challenge interview. Then again, Rockefeller is synonymous with oil, which is probably best left unmentioned – not unlike selling your green-energy cable network to an oil-backed media outlet.
Climate change activism (like love) means never having to say you’re sorry.

David Ball
September 30, 2014 3:48 pm

Alarmists and facts are mutually exclusive.

September 30, 2014 6:04 pm

I’m really surprised that some of Bill McKibben statements don’t appear in http://bit.ly/1rJTgFx

CTRoberts
September 30, 2014 9:32 pm

“Is Bill McKibben @350 a liar, idiot, or both?”
Yes, yes and yes… and much more not fit to print, but worthy of pointed discussion in a court of law!… in the penalty phase.

October 1, 2014 7:25 am

6 of 1 & half a doz. of the other I would say!!

Walt Allensworth
October 8, 2014 3:44 pm

But.. but… their motives are pure, so taking money from big oil and employing deceitful astroturfing methods is ok.
Right? Anyone?
(hopefully no /sarc tag needed)

%d bloggers like this: