Inside Climate News caught with their hand in the Rockefeller cookie jar #ExxonKnew

From the well funded corporate scumbags department.

Rockefellers Promised Access to Publisher of InsideClimate News, Emails Show

By Katie Brown

InsideClimate News (ICN) has insisted over and over that the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) and the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), which have been bankrolling the entire #ExxonKnew campaign, have absolutely no editorial authority over the stories they publish, including the series they released last year proclaiming that Exxon “knew” about climate change in the 1970s before climate scientists even understood the data. This is something the media has largely swallowed without scrutiny.

But newly released emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign raise serious questions about the veracity of these claims. In one telling email, Michael Northrop of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund ( sends Clinton campaign chair John Podesta an article by #ExxonKnew activist Naomi Oreskes with the subject line:



ICN publisher David Sassoon, who just happens to be a former Rockefeller Brothers Fund consultant, has repeatedly brushed off the accusation that the anti-fossil fuel billionaires funding #ExxonKnew have had any hand in what ICN is doing. As Politico reported,

“InsideClimate News, which was named a Pulitzer Prize finalist last month for its Exxon stories, says it has received $25,000 from the Rockefeller Family Fund, or about 2 percent of the company’s budget. The idea that the funding is influencing its news coverage is ‘an easy accusation, but it’s completely baseless,’ founder and publisher David Sassoon told POLITICO. ‘Our funders have no access to our editorial and they never have.’” (emphasis added)

The Washington Times further reported,

“InsideClimate founder and publisher David Sassoon, a former Rockefeller consultant who has described himself as an advocate for the ‘clean energy economy,’ dismissed the newly launched site, calling the bias allegation ‘laughable nonsense.’” (emphasis added)

According to a report by Bloomberg BNA,

“Since 2013, the separate Rockefeller Brothers Fund has provided InsideClimate with $200,000 a year; that fund had no say over what the website published, according to David Sassoon, InsideClimate’s founder and publisher.” (emphasis added)

And, as ICN says on its “About” page:

“Donors who support our award-winning environmental journalism do not have access to our editorial process or decision-making. Please be mindful of false reports that suggest otherwise, or that seek to discredit our news organization with misinformation and mischaracterization. Our hard-hitting watchdog reporting provokes retaliation and unfounded smears of many varieties. We do not respond to most of them. Our work speaks for itself.” (emphasis added)

The Rockefellers have made similar pronouncements, of course. Lee Wasserman, the long-time director of the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF), who actually spearheaded a January 2016 strategy meeting at the RFF headquarters to strategize ways to “delegitimize” Exxon, told the Huffington Post that RFF had no idea that ICN was going to produce its #ExxonKnew series:

“Wasserman said the grant to Inside Climate News was made without any knowledge that it would be used for the reporting project. The grant to Columbia Journalism School was directed at ‘public interest research into what the fossil fuel industry understood about the science of climate change and how they acted given that understanding both internally and regarding the public,’ but it did not target Exxon Mobil specifically, Wasserman said.”

InsideClimate News produced a similar report quoting Wasserman as saying,

“We first learned about it when everybody else read about it,” Wasserman said. “The information that was unearthed was stunning and struck us as beyond the pale of what a corporation interested in protecting the public interest would do. … As a matter of good governance, we felt it imperative to sever our tie with the corporation.”

So Sassoon and the Rockefellers have gone overboard to swear they are not working together, but now we have an email from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, one of ICN’s biggest funders, promising Hillary’s campaign direct access to Sassoon.

Not all outlets have taken ICN and the Rockefellers at their word, however. Remember, the National Review pointed out that this relationship is a glaring conflict of interest:

“But its critics claim that InsideClimate News is essentially a mouthpiece run by a public-relations consultancy that gets its funding almost exclusively from groups with an environmental agenda…The little that is known about InsideClimate News raises questions about conflicts of interest as well as about the publication’s ability, and proclivity, to report fairly and without bias.”

Turns out the National Review’s take was just the tip of the iceberg. This latest email shows, once again, that the debunked #ExxonKnew campaign is at the beck and call of the wealthy organizations that fund it, proving its claims of editorial independence are nothing but a bad joke.

Link to blog post:

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 1, 2016 12:53 pm

This story makes me think of a book I’ve been reading, Galileo’s Middle Finger by Alice Dreger. It’s a study of how some nasty characters try to subvert science for their own self-serving motives.
Dreger checks everything and often finds that things that look true are just fabrications. The bad guys are smart but they usually can’t cover up all their tracks. The Northrop email is an example of that.

Mark J Takatz
Reply to  commieBob
November 1, 2016 5:12 pm

Based on what’s been going down this year, I’m thinking the bad guys aren’t really all that good. The comment by Donna LaFramboise… it’s all being perpetrated from the bat-cave… by an intern.

November 1, 2016 12:54 pm

While I agree that it’s likely the Rockefeller fund was behind the Exxon knew meme I don’t see any “smoking gun” in offering to introduce the Clinton campaign to the editor. So they know each other and are in agreement…no big deal. I think it’s kind of interesting that, in a sense, the Rockefeller fund is the legacy of that oil family and if I’m not mistaken, Exxon is the child of a forced break up of the original Standard Oil; the flagship company of that family

Reply to  fossilsage
November 1, 2016 1:02 pm

Agreed. Can’t see anything very interesting here.

Samuel C Cogar
Reply to  mothcatcher
November 1, 2016 2:17 pm

As Yogi Bear might say, ……. “Ya gotta look before ya can see.”
The Rockefeller fund is not just the legacy of that oil family, ……. but the legacy of “that fossil fuel family, …… oil, coal and natural gas” ….. which once had huge holdings in Appalachia.
The Rockefeller family “planted” a fox in the hen-house to protect their investments in fossil fuels when Jay Rockefeller moved to Emmons, West Virginia to serve as a VISTA worker in 1964.
You figure it out, …… a New York Republican moves to WV to be a VISTA worker in 1964, ….. registers as a Democrat and is elected to the WV House of Delegates in 1966-1967, …….. elected to WV Secretary of State in 1968-1972, ……. appointed President of WV Wesleyan College 1973-1975, …….. elected to Governor of WV from 1977 to 1985, …….. elected to be WV’s US Senator from 1985 to 2015.
The now retired Sen. Jay Rockefeller’s (D-W.Va.) net worth is somewhere between $101 million and $240 million. The ex-West Virginia Senator is the great-grandson of the oil tycoon John D. Rockefeller.
Read more @

Reply to  fossilsage
November 1, 2016 1:45 pm

If they made the same offer to the Trump campaign, then it would probably be no big deal. But if they are that confident that they can pull the strings of InsideClimate News to get the editor to work in a partisan way with the Clinton campaign, how much further does their influence extend? And do they really have “no say over what the website published”? This brings in to question how nonpartisan and independent the website really is.

Reply to  Louis
November 2, 2016 2:35 am

The problem I have with their excuse of “no editorial control”, is that the bread and butter of this ‘news’ (opinion) source, is Climate Alarmism; so it’s kind of hard to ever go off message, deliver a message counter to your Alarmist backers, or to upset your funding if you’re simply doing what your founding mandate requires – Alarmism. No editorial control is required if your only directive to remain funded is to churn out single vector propaganda. You know: “Moose will freeze in Yellowstone and not recover because of global warming” … they probably sit around in a board room, swimming in Rockefeller money, and try to come up with even the most crackpot borderline laughable stories, just to make it through to the weekend when they can jet off to Aspen to schmooze with their backers.
Sassoon ??? Is this David Sassoon in any way related to the super opium running House of Lords British Empire Anglo-Jewish family that was founded by a David Sassoon (Treasurer of Baghdad first half 19th century)? This family was actually probably bigger than Jardine Matheson, super secretive, and had relations with Russell & Co., the American opium runners that were related to the Samuel Russell family associated with Yale Skull & Bones (W.H.Russell, founder) … Yale of course being where the Rockefellers had their ground breaking oil cracking research (by the famous Bissell family) undertaken, not to mention the direct link between the Rockefeller’s and S&B through Avery Rockefeller and that OTHER branch of the family shacked up with the Wall Street crowd. Sassoon is not a very common name, and if David Sassoon is from this Anglo-Jewish-American family, there will be a BIG back story to such a connection.

Reply to  Louis
November 2, 2016 3:48 am

So, I went looking to see if David Sassoon is a scion of the Anglo-Jewish opium dynasty, and it would seem that he strongly resembles (ears, shape of face, hairline), Sir Victor Sassoon, who may be his grandfather given their ages. Victor built a China trade empire that rivaled Jardine Matheson, and some of the Sassoon’s (including the current sitting British House of Lord’s baron Sassoon) were also directors or managing directors of Jardine Matheson – all having strong ties to HSBC on the financial side. Victor finally shut up shop in Shanghai, and moved all of his wealth offshore to Nassau, Bahamas, and from what I have read his children are the closest to being offshore-ready to the continental United States than any other current branch (Britain and Singapore).
Photo of Sir Victor Sassoon:
Photo of David Sassoon (publisher):
… pretty darn identical physiological resemblance if you ask me.
Considering that this super wealthy drug running Sassoon family is intermarried with the Rothschild family, and that the Rothschild’s are also off-shored on Guernsey and Jersey Isles (secrecy jurisdictions/tax havens) where Al Gore has one of two of his ‘green’ investment funds domiciled (the other main fund being domiciled in the City of London; where else), it is quite possible that the Nassau Sassoon’s may be one of the Western Hemisphere super gofers that this offshore complex driving the Climate Hustle utilize on the continental United States. Remember that David Meyer De Rothschild was one of the main drivers behind the 7/7/2007 Live Earth Al Gore PR stunts (David Rothschild wrote and published the official handbook for that sickening PR event targeting teens using rock music group think).
The Rothschild’s, Gore and his fund partner Lord Blood, and the British Sassoon’s are all part of the same investment crowd, with their cash stashed in the British offshore tax haven system, and the National Review calls Sassoon’s shadowy backers part of something formally known in the Senate report as the “Billionaire’s Club”. To call the three Sassoon branches billionaires, from my own extensive research, is an understatement:
National Review: “InsideClimate News lists some of its donors on its website — and many of these organizations belong to what in a minority report of the Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works is described as “an elite group of left-wing millionaires and billionaires, [known as] the ‘Billionaire’s Club,’ [which] directs and controls the far-left environmental movement, which in turn controls major policy decisions and lobbies on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.”
Read more at:
Is this David Sassoon perhaps a dual citizen of Bahamas and the United States? Trained at Harvard with a media company domiciled in New York City to assist in driving US Politics and EPA policy for his friends in the offshore zone? Carbon taxation for the peasants, and no taxation for their own hoarded wealth and ‘philanthropic’ ‘non-profit’ endeavors? Sounds like the usual M.O., of scumbag Imperialists.
Maybe someone reading this has a contact in New York media who can confirm Sassoon’s family background? I hope so, because he is a dead ringer for Sir Victor Opium King.

Reply to  Louis
November 2, 2016 10:38 am

U.S. Census records reveal where parents were born. More Census records are released every 10 years. So the 1960 records may have been released. Census records from 1850 on provide family information in 10 year intervals.
Look for online U.S. Census records.

Reply to  Louis
November 2, 2016 11:10 pm

Barbara – I looked but couldn’t find anything because this is a Bahamas Sassoon family that wouldn’t be in the US Census. Strangely, David Sassoon’s only published book was “Tiny Specks in a Hurry: The Story of a Journey to Mustang” (, published in 2014, in which he reminisces about 2 trips through Nepal to meet with the King of Nepal in 1983 and 2008. David Sassoon also was for FOUR YEARS resident in Kathmandu in Nepal from 1980 to 1984, then working as the managing editor of Action for Children, a quarterly tabloid published by the Non-Governmental Organizations Committee on UNICEF in New York (
The reason I find this interesting, is that later in life the super wealthy Bahamian Sir Victor Sassoon converted to Buddhism (not a common event for a super elite Jew). Victor died without children, but he had many brothers who worked with the family businesses dealing mostly in Shanghai with HSBC connections, and his ‘family’ are still in Nassau, Bahamas, also assisting management of the Victor Sassoon Heart Foundation. Now, Buddha’s ‘birthplace’ is in Lumbini, Nepal. Under the UNESCO directed plans to ‘preserve’ Lumbini, a private Trust has been setup called the Lumbini Development Trust which controls site management, but the legal site ownership is of course the Government of Nepal, which is headed by the President, but before 2007 the King of Nepal was the ‘owner’ of national Land Title, and he was cultivated by none other than David Sassoon and Steven Rockefeller. Steven Rockefeller is a Zen Buddhist. Nepali Royal and Political history is interesting, and one wonders whether foreign intrigue was behind the 2001 ‘Royal Massacre’ and the 2007/08 transition to a ‘Republic’ (Maoist), which is the same year David Sassoon decided to revisit the Nepalese King and crown prince, who is on the board of the shadowy APECF (see below).
Anyone think the dominant Rockefeller and Sassoon connection with the otherwise poor King and crown prince of Nepal is monetary in nature? But it gets better:
### UNESCO World Heritage Site #666, “Lumbini: Birthplace of the Lord Buddha”
… the official UNESCO site number is 666 for God’s sake !!! (ie, the ‘number of the beast’ in the Holy Bible! coincidentally Carbon atoms also have 6-Protons, 6 Neutrons, and 6-Electrons) Also the Lumbini Trust is building a MASSIVE religious site with New Age shrines centered around a massive circle and cross plan, many miles across, centered on the apparent birthplace of Buddha. Even the locals have been fighting the Trust appointees because it has apparently been overtaken by internationalists claiming to ‘preserve’ the Nepali cultural heritage, when in fact they are simply appropriating the site as a mega New Age spiritualist center under UN auspices, disregarding the local Buddhists’ opinions. But it gets better and even more sinister:
… a 1.9 Billion Pound ($3M USD) Buddhist Mecca, funded by APECF, a shadowy fund dovetailed in with the Lumbini Dev. Trust, backed by the Chinese Communist Party, the American Jewish Congress (! Sassoon Anglo-American-Jewish families intermarried with the Rothschild’s?), and the Rockefeller family represented by Steven C. Rockefeller (RBF), which is affiliated with the reigning Maoist Unified Communist Party of Nepal who overthrew the last King but is supported by the crown prince.
### STEVEN CLARK ROCKEFELLER has published/edited only three books:
# The Christ and the Bodhisattva (SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies). Edited by Donald S. Lopez Jr., and Steven C. Rockefeller. State University of New York Press (1987)
# John Dewey: Religious Faith and Democratic Humanism. Columbia University Press (1991). Authored by Steven C. Rockefeller.
# Spirit and Nature — Why the Environment Is a Religious Issue: An Interfaith Dialogue. Edited by Steven C. Rockefeller and John C. Elder. Beacon Press (1992).
David Sassoon is listed in The Interfaith Observer as a contributor ( John Dewey was listed by Antony C. Sutton in “America’s Secret Establishment: An Intro to the Order of Skull & Bones” (1983), as the primary mechanism used to take over the academic institutions in the US in order to control US Democracy and public opinion from the ground up; specifically to transform the student body into an emotionalized group-thinking block able to perpetually mold upcoming political policy using the ‘educated’ next generations, also allowing Progressives to seize control of all major academic faculties. John Dewey was fueled by Rockefeller funds (they started at Yale but targeted Columbia Uni. and Uni. of Chicago as their main recruiting grounds, especially in social sciences and psychology).
QUESTION: Do you all think that this global Carbon (human) control movement is A) for financial gain B) for religious purposes C) for political purposes D) for all three reasons (like most cult movements)?
QUESTION: Does a Zero-Carbon religio-political movement seem compatible with a nihilistic faith claiming that mankind’s greatest spiritual goal should be to seek non-existence in Samsara? Does a worldwide Jim Jones cult compatible with the extreme left-wing post-industrial-world SJW zombie apocalypse mind-set come to mind? A totalitarian communist political flavor bent on ‘destruction of the self’ is also not incompatible, as per George Orwell’s 1984 description of the Asian block of the tripartite ‘war is peace’ world order.
… science without any debate … [for finance reasons] … this quote says it all:
“From our vantage point it is clear to us that the scientific certainty of global warming is no longer worth debating” – RBF, 2005 Annual Report, Pg 3. … just like a religious faith.
Above quote from a one page title headline on page 3 of the Rock. Bro. Fund Annual Report (This report lists David Sassoon as being one of eight contributing authors, including Steven C. Rockefeller. It seems that Sassoon pops up as a major contributor throughout RBF publications and Annual Reports for decades).
Sorry for the long conspiratorial-esque comments, but you just can’t make up stuff this bizarre .. or scary, and I believe the link between the religious aspects of the CAGW movement condense in Steven C. Rockefeller and David Sassoon … this is a story that a professional author NEEDS to cover.
For more info on the Lumbini Buddhist Mecca that RBF is secretly pushing, this Dropbox from concerned Nepali locals contains some unbelievable planning info: … this UNESCO site is a mega cult center planned to be bigger than the actual Arabian Mecca.

November 1, 2016 1:12 pm

It’s all smoke & mirrors. Banksters are behind the lot:
John Doran.

November 1, 2016 1:19 pm

Hilarious – more green troughers lying about who is pulling their strings

November 1, 2016 1:36 pm

The Rockefellers finance any group that will help them acheive their goal. kindly have a search facility which enables one to quickly see where at least some of their fundings are directed.
Start by checking or Greenpeace or Sierra Club – just a few suggestions.
Rockefellers also fund my City Council under the 100 resilient cities flag. These people, in my opinion, pose as philanthropists but, one day, I am sure they will demand a pay back.

Reply to  rogerthesurf
November 1, 2016 5:01 pm

the Rockefeller’s will support any organization that works for globalism;
tis been their objective for many years

Reply to  rogerthesurf
November 2, 2016 11:03 am

J. W. McCallister and CPA Thomas D. Schauf, cited as sources for this article, are peddling bul**hit. It is speculation dreamt up in the 1950-1990 period when the Federal Reserve believed it could keep its operations secret and non-transparent. That has since changed. And, as I explain at the end, controlling the USD is small-fry for what Rothschild and Rockefeller are attempting to do.
The Federal Reserve has four types of clients:
(1) US government
(2) US banks
(3) Foreign governments
(4) Foreign banks
That’s it. Eight families in the basements of the City of London DO NOT OWN the Federal Reserve. Nor do they control it. Only banks can vote at a district Federal Reserve. Not shareholders, and each bank, regardless of size, has one vote. You can see the shareholders of all US banks by using the Edgar search engine at In fact, if any foreign bank wants to do business in the US, or deal in USD in any form it must have a correspondent bank account at the Federal Reserve by either opening a branch in the US itself, or using a US-based bank as counterparty. Those bank shareholder names are also available at
Furthermore, no US dollar can leave the US banking system, by law. All foreign bank accounts denominated in USD are parked in one of the 12 District Federal Reserve banks. Again, by law. With the exception of the coin and cash used for the public’s daily transactions—currently about 11.5%-12% of the total physical currency in circulation—all USD in existence are parked in either a commercial bank account in the US or treasury securities in your bank’s savings account at the Fed. All of it. If you buy a house in the south of France with USD, the money leaves your bank account and is transferred to seller Pierre’s foreign bank account at the Fed for onward forwarding to Pierre’s account at that foreign bank, again, parked in a District Federal Reserve bank. China sold us (ok, Walmart and Best Buy) almost $2 trillion worth of stuff before the Great Recession. Walmart and Best Buy paid in USD. Where are those Chinese USD profits? Sitting in treasury securities at the Fed.
The Federal Reserve, contrary to speculation, is an agent of the US Treasury. It is controlled by Congress and the US Treasury. It handles the nation’s payment system and the nation’s monetary policy. You can read all about it here:
The Federal Reserve does NOT do fiscal policy. That is Congress’s job, although the mofos haven’t bothered to do their job for 30 years, preferring instead to pander to the major banks for donor/lobbying fundraising dollars, and allowing the sneaky cretins to rewrite the nation’s laws to benefit the banks. That allowed the Federal Reserve political appointees (Bernanke, et al to assume it had the right in late 2008-early 2010 to give the banks worldwide $29 trillion! Congress shut that down in 2010. You can read about it here:
What Rothschild and Rockefeller want to do is far grander than dicking with the USD. They want to create and control a global currency, and trap valuable natural resources in the name of ‘protecting the environment’. They called it a New World Order, and 96-year-old David Rockefeller said in Canada two or three weeks ago that working for a New World Order is what keeps him alive at his age. That’s why Rothschild and Rockefeller invented Global Warming in 1982 or 1984, announced it at an investors’ and NGO invitation-only meeting held immediately after the Denver CO 4th Worldwide Wilderness Congress, September 1987, which was nine months before James Hansen appeared before Colorado Senator Tim Wirth (whose heiress wife was at that secret 9/87 invitation-only mtg.) in June 1988. This goes waaay back to the start of the Millennial generation in 1982; it was the only way they could snooker the kiddies. As Lenin said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

Reply to  rogerthesurf
November 2, 2016 2:36 pm

If you read Horowitz and Laksin’s The New Leviathan, you’ll see that people with a leftwing orientation have taken control of many major philanthropic organizations. (Much as they’ve taken over administrative positions in scientific organizations.) So they won’t be demanding “payback” in the way I take it you expect. They’ve taken control of the funding to promote an agenda. Many Rockefeller scions beginning with the 4th generation after J. D. Sr. also shifted over to the Left. One of them was the main bankroller of New Left activities back in the 60s. But overall, it’s not just a Rockefeller-Rothschild thing – there’s an entire generation on the same wavelength. (Most people’s thinking on this topic is too dramaturgical.)

Reply to  rw
November 2, 2016 5:17 pm

Thanks for your replies guys.
I hope you all will take time to look at my blog
To answer to rw re “payback” I refer to the process of gaining power and infiltrating/dominating an organisation.
All city councils in my country, including my City Council, have been given far reaching powers by the previous labour government here.
It is my opinion that there is enough power from this legislation that it is feasible to effectively dominate the whole country by simply dominating the local government network.
My blog shows you some of what I have observed and experienced.
Please leave a comment.

Tom Halla
November 1, 2016 1:46 pm

Inside Climate News is also not very well done. The Audobon magazine when I inherited a subscription 25 years ago had great nature photography and professional-grade articles. ICN is purely on the cheap and nasty Daily Kos model.

November 1, 2016 1:48 pm

I was just thinking it would be funny if the email that brought Clinton down was spotted on WUWT and was about something as mundane as Climate.

Paul Penrose
November 1, 2016 2:06 pm

I don’t see anything groundbreaking here. Sassoon used to work for RBF, so of course they know him and could provide an introduction. Now why Northrop would think the Clinton campaign would desire such an introduction, that is another matter. Maybe he thinks there would be some benefit to it. But everything at this point is pure speculation.

November 1, 2016 2:16 pm

This is from chapter 4 “The Rockefeller File”
Profit x Philanthropy = Power (The Power of Foundations)
“In order to scrub up his image (and possibly assuage his alleged conscience), John D. hired Ivy Lee, the nation’s most prestigious ad man of the day. Lee suggested that the aging gentleman offset his skinflint image by starting to give away money. Scrooge was to be turned into an instant Santa Claus. To begin with, Lee (the original Madison Avenue truth-twister) had Mr. Standard Oily carry around a pocketful of dimes which he would strew before deliriously happy and grateful kiddies whenever he made one of his infrequent public appearances. Cynics observed that St. John ripped off money by the millions and doled it back– a dime at a time.
Well, not quite. He had an even more Machiavellian scheme in mind. He would “give-money away to foundations under his control and then have those foundations spend the money in ways which brought even more Power and profits to the Rockefeller Empire. The money “given away ” would be bread cast upon the waters. But bread that almost always had a hook in it. John D. Jr. was to refer to this as the – principle of scientific giving.”

November 1, 2016 2:21 pm

So Koch money is evil, Rockefeller is good?

November 1, 2016 2:43 pm

A lot of posters seem to think this isn’t a smoking gun. The problem is in what they’ve claimed previously.

“Our funders have no access to our editorial and they never have.”
“Donors who support our award-winning environmental journalism do not have access to our editorial process or decision-making.”

While this email doesn’t prove that the Rockefellers have in fact manipulated ICN, it does show that their claims of ‘no access’ are laughable.
They lied, just like most of ICN’s claims were lies. It’s what lefties do.

November 1, 2016 3:12 pm

Saying that Exxon “knew” about climate change in the 1970s before climate scientists even understood the data is ridiculous, as even now, nearly fifty years later, no one, not even the scientists, knows more than a very little about ‘Climate Change’ as all the forecasts are only marginally better. The debate and research continues just as in 1970. The fog is yet to lift.

Pat Frank
Reply to  ntesdorf
November 1, 2016 3:50 pm

You’re right, ntesdorf. The result of AGW-driven of climate-model video-gamesmanship dominating the last 40 years is that climate physics itself has hardly improved since 1970.
Literally billions spent for no return at all. A more object lesson of politics sterilizing science cannot be imagined.

Pat Frank
November 1, 2016 3:44 pm

It seems the message is that Rockefeller Brothers Fund grants Inside Climate News and ICN then panders to RBF’s partisan views. ICN is partisan as well, but also knows how its bread gets buttered.
Wink, wink, nudge nudge comes to mind, as well as plausible deniability regarding editorial independence.
The whole “Exxon Knew” campaign was an obvious fabrication right from the start. That so many went for it with uncritical shouts of joy merely identified the necrotic of integrity.

November 1, 2016 4:12 pm

Northrop’s comment “….Happy to make an intro….” tells me that Sassoon had already been asked the question or that Northrop was absolutely confident that Sassoon would accept an approach. Either way it certainly points towards various misleading statements.

November 1, 2016 5:36 pm

I do not know where else to post this:
I find that any video that addresses the Huma Abedin/Hillary issue comes up black screen on Youtube. Spread the word, It is being manipulated.

Reply to  higley7
November 1, 2016 8:08 pm

Came up OK for me.

Reply to  higley7
November 1, 2016 9:23 pm

highly7, what vid, I don’t see it anywhere have you got a link ( It seems to be off topic)

November 1, 2016 9:41 pm

The only way the Democrats pull this off is Hillary gets pneumonia (or some other aliment ) and Bernie steps in . The Democrats have an insider in that FBI investigation and as soon as they confirm the obvious
the bag men for the Democrats won’t waste $Billions on getting wiped out . You don’t put hundreds of the FBI on something 16 hours a day on a whim . 160,000 E mails in an “insurance file ” ? They know nothing ? Really ?
Clinton Foundation , pay to play , intent to circumvent justice take your pick . Hillary wants the E mails released , not sure that’s her call as they are apparently only some assistants . She will get her wish rolling those dice .
It is time the boil got lanced . Let justice be served . …. Finally . The USA deserves a lot better .

Barry Sheridan
November 2, 2016 12:42 am

What is surely pertinent here is that once again we have evidence, mild though it maybe in this instance, that the rich are not the friends of the ordinary. In fact protecting their own influence and power is uppermost and nothing has threatened this than the increasing wealth of the average man and woman.

November 2, 2016 3:42 am

anti-fossil fuel billionaires funding #ExxonKnew
Anti-energy billionaires actually. The same who funded anti-nuclear power greens for the past 47 years. Paradoxically, many of their green funds began from fossil fuel money. Here’s some examples in the chart, yet there are many more. I think I counted 1700+ funders to greens and SJWs.comment image

November 2, 2016 6:32 am

It does tie the Wikileaks emails back into AGw very nicely. 😉

November 2, 2016 11:04 am

Shillary is everywhere.

November 2, 2016 2:12 pm

I’ve always wanted to know what dark forces are behind the pseudo-scientific dung heap that publishes under the pretentious name of “Ars Technica” myself? Talk about a group of whining poseurs? I can’t even count the number of times they’ve banned people for having the temerity to post comments referencing journal articles they don’t agree with. Once they banned someone for referring to carbon 14 dating uncertainty, as published by the group that defines the measures.Transparent lameness.

%d bloggers like this: