From the “Bob Ward department”.
![Bob-Ward-293x350[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/bob-ward-293x3501.jpg?quality=83)
Exposed: How top university helped secure £9million of YOUR money by passing off rivals’ research as its own… to bankroll climate change agenda
- One of the world’s leading institutes has claimed credit for its rivals’ work
- Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy made bid for more funds
- It claimed it was responsible for work published before it even existed
One of the world’s leading institutes for researching the impact of global warming has repeatedly claimed credit for work done by rivals – and used it to win millions from the taxpayer.
An investigation by The Mail on Sunday also reveals that when the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP) made a bid for more Government funds, it claimed it was responsible for work that was published before the organisation even existed. Last night, our evidence was described by one leading professor whose work was misrepresented as ‘a clear case of fraud – using deception for financial gain’. The chairman of the CCCEP since 2008 has been Nick Stern, a renowned global advocate for drastic action to combat climate change.
He is also the president of the British Academy, an invitation-only society reserved for the academic elite. It disburses grants worth millions to researchers – and to Lord Stern’s own organisation.
On Friday, the CCCEP – based jointly at the London School of Economics and the University of Leeds – will host a gala at the Royal Society in London in the peer’s honour. Attended by experts and officials from around the world, it is to mark the tenth anniversary of the blockbuster Stern Review, a 700-page report on the economic impact of climate change. The review was commissioned by Tony Blair’s Government.
The review argued that the world had to take immediate action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or face much higher future costs. It has exerted a powerful influence on successive British governments and international bodies.
Part of the CCCEP’s official mission, which it often boasts about in its public reports, is to lobby for the policies Lord Stern advocates by presenting the case for them with British and foreign governments and at UN climate talks.
Last night, CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’, both in claiming credit for studies which it had not funded and for papers published by rival academics. ‘This is regrettable, but mistakes can happen… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.
The Mail on Sunday investigation reveals today that:
- The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), which has given the CCCEP £9 million from taxpayers since 2008, has never checked the organisation’s supposed publication lists, saying they were ‘taken on trust’;
- Some of the papers the CCCEP listed have nothing to do with climate change – such as the reasons why people buy particular items in supermarkets and why middle class people ‘respond more favourably’ to the scenery of the Peak District than their working class counterparts;
- Papers submitted in an explicit bid to secure further ESRC funding not only had nothing to do with the CCCEP, they were published before it was founded;
- The publication dates of some of these papers on the list are incorrect – giving the mistaken impression that they had been completed after the CCCEP came into existence.
Academics whose work was misrepresented reacted with fury. Professor Richard Tol, a climate change economics expert from Sussex University, said: ‘It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven’t supported, and it’s fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant. I’ve never come across anything like it before. It stinks.’
The paper cited by the CCCEP of which Prof Tol is a co-author was published online by the Ecological Economics journal on July 31, 2008.
…
Mr Ward said the CCCEP is a ‘world class university research centre’, and when it asked for the second slice of funding from the ESRC, it submitted in all ‘520 research and policy outputs’ and 139 media articles. He added: ‘We reject any suggestion that we misrepresented the outputs of the Centre in our submission to the mid-term review.’ He claimed our investigation was an attempt to ‘promote climate change denial’.
‘Irascible’ is a rather tame adjective to describe Bob ‘fast fingers’ Ward.
I remember when Lomberg did his analysis a few years ago, sometime around 2011 or so, and figured then that the world had committed about a trillion bucks over that prior 20 years and global emissions had not budged. It’s amazing to me how passive the populations of the West are to this ongoing scam. I guess part of the reason why is because a lot of the money is intentionally diverted through schemes like subsidies, mandates, etc so the average person may not realize his energy cost are higher than they otherwise would be if those schemes were not in place. That and the fact that so many believe the “Big Lie” that they are “saving the world”. I always think back to the book I read chapters from during grad school, “Extraordinary Mass Delusions and the Madness of Crowds”.
Scott
another major part of the deception is the fact that PV and wind plants are built with borrowed money at cheap interest rates.Don’t let your superannuation funds invest in renewables. The final resolution of this scam will be very, very ugly.
Oh right….
It’d be Bob Ward, Nick Stern and the London School of Economics – yeah… that’s right… that LSE
Folk aren’t mentioning much about Jeremy Grantham’s actual hand up Bob.s backside that’s working his mouth.
“‘… We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.”
Shouldn’t it be ” My successor will takes steps over the next week to amend these mistakes.”
The “mistake” was getting caught.
What’s the status of the Jagdish Shukla fraud by the way?
We know we didn’t do all the research we said we did BUT we feel like we did do it and in any case we certainly would have if we’d had the 9 million quid sooner.
We will take steps over the next week to amend these mistakes,’ he said.
Would that include returning the money?
With the US printing trillions money no longer has any — or at least much — meaning.
money no longer has any — or at least much — meaning.
===========
it was never about money, it was about debt. who owns the debt and who owes the debt. because if you own the debt you own the person that owes the debt. slavery without the chains.
Wrong-o, ferdberple: At the billions and trillions, who owes, owns. Miss a payment? Whose economy tanks?
Aw, crap. After reading my last comment, it is apparent I’m going to have to comment beyond the usual sound byte.
Fiat money is not real: If not based on a varying scarcity value of a commodity (e.g. gold); money is worth whatever your government says it is. The bigger the government, the more we believe it. The more imaginary money/debt/faith we place in a government, the stronger it will be, the greater the value of its fiat money.
If (and when?) we lose faith in the U.S. Government, the value of the dollar will fall. Do any of you realize that the credit rating of the U.S. Government has fallen? The more the U.S. prints money, the more it deficit spends, the weaker it is on the world stage? Deficit spending on green boondoggles is just that. It makes us weaker.
Screw all you watermelons. Real men and women know how to improve human existence. Invest in capitalism, or wither and die.
There’s an old saying.
When you owe the bank $1000, the bank owns you.
When you owe the bank $1,000,000, you own the bank.
That is, if you should decide to default on your debt, the bank goes under.
Hillary has recommended printing more food stamps to fix the economy.
“If you want to understand why people behave in a certain way, look and see what behavior is rewarded”.
(from – “The Greatest Management Principle in the World”)
This is not just “mistakes” it is deliberate misrepresentation of other people’s work to obtain financial gain.
Most people, apart from “Greens” and “Libtards” call this “Fraud”.
“Most people, apart from “Greens” and “Libtards” call this “Fraud”.”
Waiting for Mosh or NIck to come and say this is all ok. !!
Stern-gate!!!!!
And we proles are supposed to take-a-lead from the nobility of the Land?
Stengate? Paging Delingpole.
Grrr..Sterngate
Mr Ward is advised that more than two millennia ago Plato wrote:
“Once a man is caught in a reprehensible fraud, for ever after he is not believed even when he told the truth.”
In Plato’s ideal world, may be. In real world, he get’s reelected.
It is some time since I retired from University research, but I know how difficult it was to get even a few £100K from the UK science research councils – even if your submission was rated very highly your chances of actually being funded were very poor because of the limited funds. It really distresses me that any academics would stoop to this level and prevent other honest applicants from obtaining funding (but I suppose it just goes to show that climate activists aren’t real scientists or real academics)
I am glad you added the last sentence.
CCCEP spokesman Bob Ward admitted it had ‘made mistakes’,
=====================================
so why should we believe you have not made other mistakes? How can we trust your finding on something hard like climate science, when you can’t even get right something as simple as knowing which papers you’ve written?
oh yes, trust us, we are climate scientists. here is the list of the work we have done. er, no that is wrong, here is the list of work we haven’t done. but trust us, the work we have done, well that is first rate. even if we didn’t actually do it.
Richard has vented his anger all day on twitter, and rightly so, with Bob the scam Ward replying with out and out ‘Terminological inexactitudes’ Churchill.
I rather think that “Sasha” hit the nail on the head when he wrote “THE TRUTH ABOUT BOB WARD AND THE GRANTHAM INSTITUTE” in a previous WUWT thread.
If you can’t locate it let me know and I shall point it out. (It is revealing; very revealing).
Regards,
WL
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/09/wsj-matt-ridley-replies-to-jeff-sachs-and-bob-ward-cleans-up-their-intellectual-mess/#comment-1732490
In the US he would merely have to say, “We strongly identify with those who did the research, and feel we are one of them.”
Acceptance would be demanded by those in university.
The planet is cooling and in the end all the words in the world will not conceal the fact. And if those scientist who warn that we may be heading for a Maunder minimum are right things are going to get very tough. It is estimated that in the last event that up to one third of the planets population perished through famine and cold. I read this item about France yesterday. I am also aware of crop failure in Papua New guinea Vietnam and Norway. There will be many more. All ignored.
http://www.politico.eu/article/france-farmers-wheat-harvest-failure-suicide/
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-11/crops-still-failing-to-provide-as-food-shortage/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-18/drought-killing-vietnam-rice-crops-compounds-mekong-water-crisis
Etc etc.
Chris
You can add to that list Canada.
Saskatchewan’s wheat harvest has been cut short by rain and snow:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/harvest-stall-continues-saskatchewan-oct2016-1.3813663
It’s simple either the work is your own or someone else’s , pay back the govt and let the owners of the plagiarised papers sue .
“I, too, have made many mistakes…” Walter Funk, Nuremberg defendant. (found guilty)
“If I have made mistakes in my work…” Ernst Kaltenbrunner, Nuremberg defendant. (found guilty)
‘a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.’
Even worse here in the U.S.A.
Here, all universities claim ownership of all papers published.
Did the University President do the research NO!
Did the University President write the research paper? NO!
Did the University President write the grant proposal? NO!
Was the grant proposal, research and paper done by a “university employee”? NO!
At my “university” term and tenured Faculty are not “employees” of the university.
Only those payed by certain Fund Money are employees.
Who are the employees? President, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, Provosts and administrative staffs.
Why?
Term and Tenured Faculty are “payed” by Grant (Agency, Federal, and State).
“Payed” means: hourly salary, healthcare, medical, retirement, time-off (annual leave use-or-loose per year), time-off (sick leave. If I quit the money goes to the university).
Ah Ha! I a “term or tenured” faculty is … payed by the University, then that person can be fired at will without recourse! So no “term or tenured” faculty wants to by “payed” by the University!
The university “pays” me nothing! And it takes currently 48% from any grant I write that is funded as overhead.
So far I have not seen many U.S.A. University Presidents getting up before Press to announce “I have made a GREAT DISCOVERY”.
[ I digress. A few years ago the “President” of a Quasi-Government Agency in Japan did hold a Press Conference of his ASTONISHING SCIENTIFIC FINDING”! None others, in Japan at least, have repeated that! Well, U.K. is the last Communist Union Soviet on Earth! Isn’t It! True True. ]
Why?
Most U.S.A. University Presidents, 99% I would wager, are too busy trying to scheme Title IX to 1) hide their “Booty Safaris” with NCAA student athletes and 2) use Title IX to scapegoat a subordinate admin/staff to take the fall. Ha ha Penn State!
That is the shenanigans part-n-parcel at my university here in the Blessed U.S.A.!