New court filings illuminate academia’s deep role in climate industry

Guest Post by Chris Horner

You may have noticed the media cycle has subtly begun for next week’s House Oversight Committee climate change show-trial, as energy crises unfold worldwide and President Biden prepares to take 13 Cabinet members and no grants of legislative authority from Congress supporting his “climate” agenda to the annual “Conference of the Parties” in Glasgow (where, like President Obama before him, he will claim that while legislative authority would be nice, in its absence he will do what he wants anyway — not, in fact, how these things are supposed to work).

With that backdrop, see the attached opening trial brief and declarations of Lindzen, Happer, Horner and Walter which were filed on Friday in open records litigation in Los Angeles. The subject of the records at issue is the role of academia (specifically, plaintiffs’ tort bar consultants among UCLA Law faculty) in the climate litigation industry, and what they boast of to at least one major donor behind these efforts. You may recall one such email by UCLA Law faculty describing the AGs, activists, “prospective funders” and faculty gathering at the “secret meeting at Harvard” was “about going after climate denialism—along with a bunch of state and local prosecutors nationwide”. 

As context to the Regents’ behavior in this matter, the trial brief and declarations detail the climate industry’s Enron origins, and the role of academics supporting the plaintiffs’ effort (also noted is the spate of briefings of federal judges by the plaintiffs’ side, initiated after Judge Alsup dismissed litigation against oil companies in the Northern District of California, which briefings also trace back to UCLA faculty).

In another footnote, early in the attached Horner Declaration, you’ll find timely reference to a 1999 email warning of the consequences of seeking to rig the economics of the energy industry in the name of “global warming” (later, climate change). Cue the past few weeks’ headlines from around the world manifesting just those consequences:

Maybe Enron can dodge the macro problem and have our micro benefits, but then again I have to think that a politicized international energy market for any reason will create as much or more downside than upside. (April 1, 1999 memo to Lay)

It is difficult to escape the conclusion that, as cynical as they were about it, Enron Knew.…a couple very important things*. Despite being the company that had bet the most on greenhouse warming and most wanted the alarmism to take root, Enron also knew the systemic economic risks from pushing the climate agenda. But, in the pursuit to “make [itself] rich,” plowed ahead. Others followed in Enron’s footsteps, with far too much success, and we all are now facing the consequences.

* PS See here for the other key point Enron knew, something that puts the lie to the very foundation underpinning the ongoing climate litigation tsunami — Enron knew and bitterly debated the uncertainties of the theory underpinning the climate agenda.

The excerpts from and links to emails and memos debunk the claims that, as one piece put it, “The Utilities Knew, Exxon Knew, Shell Knew, They All Knew” of catastrophic man-made global warming in the 1970s, or 1980s…showing there was instead intense and often bitter internal fighting over the risks of designing business plans around the theory when it was so laden with uncertainty. That was in the late 1990s.

5 21 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
paul courtney
Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:01 pm

Phillips. Really?
Link unnecessary.

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:03 pm

The Guardian and Greenpeace. Really?

Reply to  RicDre
October 18, 2021 12:44 pm

You don’t know how proud he is that he didn’t use CNN .

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:05 pm

Old, old old news. Try something original, like someone being paid by Big Oil. Oh, wait. You lose points when this high school mentality takes over.

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:12 pm

Ha ha ha


Very funny

Last edited 1 year ago by strativarius
Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:47 pm

how is casting doubt on climate science any worse than casting doubt on climate sceptics?

Dave Fair
Reply to  Lrp
October 19, 2021 1:03 pm

One is critically reviewing work products. The other is personal attacks. Your wording seems confused.

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 12:56 pm

Greenpeace said it had approached a total of seven prominent figures in the US and UK climate denial movement. The other five declined, either citing time pressures and area of expertise, or just did not respond.”

No mention of these five by name in this hit piece because they would remain entirely credible.

Not that Happer did anything wrong whatsoever. His belief is that CO2 isn’t harmful and offered to write a paper stating that. What the article didn’t point out is that any paper written by Happer wouldn’t be conventionally peer reviewed because he is cancelled by journals.

The fact that peer review itself is in trouble because of the innumerable AI documents submitted and passed is reason enough for Happer to suggest honest scientists were selected to review any document he produced.

No mention of any of that by dishonest journalists playing to the gallery. Nor from you for that matter.

And I’ll call it uncritical analysis rather than deceit, by people like you, is familiar to regulars here.

Reply to  HotScot
October 18, 2021 1:21 pm

They call themselves Greenpeace while demonising the essential gas for their “green ” as pollutant.
You can’t become more Judas than that,
except when your organisation was created during the ice age scare scam and noone is willing to remember the scam.

Harry Passfield
Reply to  SxyxS
October 19, 2021 1:34 am

They demonize it by calling a green gas, black! Where is BLM when they’re needed?

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 1:14 pm

Your link is the evidence of Greenpeace as a deceptive, manipulative and abhorrent organization. Will Happer is a gentleman of unquestioned knowledge and ethics. Should he choose to expose the benefits of rising CO2 to the people who are daily blasted with the climate propaganda generated by the climate mafia, he is then doing humanity a great service. As one of the worlds most expert scientists in radiation physics, his views on the very limited role of CO2 in climate warming should be studied in detail, rather than swept under the rug by the fools who think undermining societies energy underpinnings is good policy. If all you have is Greenpeace malfeasance as criticism, then I can assume you lack any scientific evidence to counter Dr. Happer’s views. There may be a job for you somewhere slinging mud for a living but I suspect you would be overpaid.

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 2:39 pm

No doubt Greenpeace copied Hillary Clinton & John Podesta about what they unearthed:

WikiLeaks Exposes Podesta-Steyer Climate McCarthyism

The latest WikiLeaks dump contains plenty of insider dirt on John Podesta, the founder of the Center for American Progress and the campaign manager for Hillary Clinton. Perhaps the tawdriest story to be exposed by Podesta’s pilfered e-mails is the bragging by an employee of ThinkProgress, an arm of the Center for American Progress, about how they got Roger Pielke Jr.’s scalp.

In a recent Twitter posting, Pielke wrote: “Propaganda works: I count more than 160 articles at the Center for American Progress trashing me over the years.”

I hope posting that Guardian comment was in jest. At one time Greenpeace & the Guardian were the real deal, but unfortunately both have followed the following script:

Twitter user David Burge provided one of the finest, and most succinct, descriptions of modern leftism in a brief tweet back in 2015:

1. Identify a respected institution.

2. kill it.

3. gut it.

4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect.

Meanwhile those doing real investigative journalism, science and whistle blowing are: de-platformed (Glen Greenwald), unemployed (Peter Ridd), living in exile (Edward Snowden) or in jail (Julian Assange).

Isn’t it interesting how almost all whistle blowers fêted by the corporate media these days always seem to forward the objectives of government institutions and corporations these days. I remember when it was the reverse.

Last edited 1 year ago by Anon
Max More
Reply to  Anon
October 18, 2021 6:19 pm

Well, Glen Greenwald is now re-platformed on Substack. I’m loving substack for the independent thinkers you can find there.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 2:47 pm

“Greenpeace said it had approached a total of seven prominent figures in the US and UK climate denial movement

There is no such organization, agency or group. So how could they approach fantasies of their own delusions? You’re being lied to … and you have the effrontery to post it on these pages?

Gaslighting Will Happer is an absurdity. He has more scientific credibility, stature and ethics than the entire alarmist camp combined. Pick on someone your own size … like Bill Nye the science guy or Mikee Mann.

Last edited 1 year ago by Rory Forbes
Reply to  Rory Forbes
October 18, 2021 2:58 pm

They must have forgotten to give you the secret handshake. Let Anthony Watts know so we can correct this. /sarc (lol)

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Anon
October 18, 2021 5:55 pm

Oh bugger … kept in the dark again, how disappointing!

Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 5:16 pm

Greenpeace doesn’t have to tell any truths. When sued in Canadian Court, their defense was, we’re providing entertainment not facts.

Joe Peck
Reply to  John Phillips
October 18, 2021 6:01 pm

The Guardian? Is that a joke? Really?

J Mac
October 18, 2021 11:41 am

Interlocking rings of socialist fraud, conspiring to control energy markets and punish oil, gas, and coal companies….. Is anyone surprised?

October 18, 2021 11:48 am

CNBC presenter Hadley Gamble interviews President Putin about Russian ‘gas war’ on the West Europe.

Richard Page
Reply to  Vuk
October 18, 2021 12:23 pm

Wasn’t that the one where she was accused of wearing some sort of makeup on her legs in order to distract Putin?

Reply to  Richard Page
October 18, 2021 12:41 pm

Did you really just reply and ask that? The video link is, um, right there…

Richard Page
Reply to  Ruleo
October 18, 2021 3:33 pm

Oops yes, I did. My bad. I hadn’t clicked on the link, just naturally assumed from Vuk’s explanation that it was the actual interview, not the Russian commentary!

October 18, 2021 11:54 am

The Ranch at the Crooked E, Enron of Houston Texas, did not just disappear, it changed to the Ranch at the Crooked EU.
Russia precisely identified the cause of the crazy energy prices as an EU program for Spot Prices, not long term contracts. exactly Enron‘s scam. So, while Arthur Anderson, the Enron accounting outfit was disbanded for fraud, they simply moved to Price Waterhouse Cooper PWC – and continued the exact same scam. The horse galloped from the Houston Ranch to Brussels Stables!
And I was wondering why so many horse stables operate nearby!

October 18, 2021 12:16 pm

Tonight Phil Jones is being reborn in the BBCs The Trick

Yes, the narrative is he was right all along

Even though he wasn’t

Reply to  fretslider
October 18, 2021 12:40 pm

Ooops, the Google Robot needs a flash update !!!!

Search for The Trick and the Bot delivers :

Trick is a 2019 American slasher film directed by Patrick Lussier and starring Jamie Kennedy and Omar Epps

A complaint at Alphabet is in order!

Reply to  bonbon
October 18, 2021 1:54 pm
Richard Page
Reply to  fretslider
October 18, 2021 12:44 pm

Well I have a relatively strong stomach – I managed about 6 minutes before having to switch over. Portraying Phil Jones as a broken victim of an evil hacking conspiracy – “the human cost of getting to the truth of the climategate scandal.” It was cloying, saccharine pap designed to extort an emotional reaction for the ‘poor, hard-done by but honest scientist’ (yup – we’re supposed to think he’s some honest guy just doing his job getting picked on by nasty deniers). Made me want to puke.

Last edited 1 year ago by Richard Page
Reply to  Richard Page
October 18, 2021 2:02 pm

A bit of the trailer was more than I could stand

Reply to  Richard Page
October 18, 2021 2:12 pm

Watched it to the end, obvious propaganda by the writer putting words into peoples mouths. Reference to Stephen Mosher reproducing the graph from the same data, but if the data hides the MWP then it will produce the same graph. Unfortunately my wife took it all in hook, line and sinker. My son will probably do the same when he watches it on BBC iPlayer.

Reply to  JohnC
October 18, 2021 3:45 pm

I watched the one after on BBC 4 – Climategate : The Science of a Scandal. That didn’t look like a Berkeley Earth graph they flashed up near the end. BBC cheating again? Wouldn’t surprise me.

Mikey Mann was in good form. Mikey wonders why there aren’t people attacking theoretical physics in the same way he claims climate science is attacked. He claims it’s because Big Oil is behind the latter. Well Mikey, as far as I know theoretical physics
doesn’t want us to spend trillions on a potentially non-existent problem with us ending up a costly and ineffective energy supply with a bonus of a wrecked economy. That might have something to do with it.

Right-Handed Shark
Reply to  fretslider
October 18, 2021 1:11 pm

Who’s playing mickey mann? As he’s so fond of “bad actors”, I kinda hope he is being portrayed by Keanu Reeves giving it the full John Wick.

Richard Page
Reply to  Right-Handed Shark
October 18, 2021 1:23 pm

Not even in it. I’m waiting for Mickey Mann to sue the BBC for either not having him in it or for mentioning the ‘hockey stick graph’ in relation to Phil Jones instead of him!

Harry Passfield
Reply to  Richard Page
October 19, 2021 1:29 am

In the script they actually said the HS was down to Briffa. Hmm.

October 18, 2021 12:42 pm

I’m no economist but I wonder if the world’s bankers have not decided that the world’s financial markets are so attenuated by borrowing and derivatives that only a massive program of new spending can keep them going, and this is the reason for the creation of the ‘climate crisis’. Only this vast new spending campaign can (they believe) avert complete collapse. Can anyone here evaluate this proposition? Thanks.

Reply to  Mark Shulgasser
October 18, 2021 2:23 pm

Imo opinion your theory is only right because any FIAT currency will collapse in the end as all Pyramid schemes do.
It is integral part of the system.

If the bankers wanted to avert complete collapse they would never ever attack the energy infrastructure and supply of a country,nor would they have allowed their puppet Biden to shut the economy down and to increase energy prizes – because this increases the speed of collapse.
They want to transfer the system towards communism disguised as Agenda 21 / 2030
and the 3.5 trillion infrastructure Bill.
This was always the plan otherwise Wall Street would have never financed the “russian” revolution.
They wouldn’t have sent Trotsky to start the revolution (Trotsky lived in new York before he started the revolution)
And AOC (New York )was sent to tell us that we only have until(agenda) 2030 to save the world.
Rockefellers(New York) would have never donated the UN building territory
Warburg(New York ) would have never announced a world government in front of congress
and Edmond de Rothschild wouldn’t have introduced 190 nations to agenda 21 at the UN summit in Rio in 1992.
The cloward-piven strategy is about a deliberate ruin of the USA with debts btw..

AGW is a massive wealth transfer – towards the super rich.
Just as covid is (research how much more billionaires we have now and by how much Gates,Zuckerberg etc increased their wealth during the crisis).
They try to transfer as much wealth as possible towards themselves before they pull the plug,start massive inflation (already happening) and use AGW ,covid,inflation to centralize everything.
It is impossible to implement a global tax without a global crisis.
(and the next crisis will be a currency crisis to justify a global currency
and a vax pass will be used as Trojan horse to centralize all our data(face,health,blood type,banc account & transfers,social credit score,location )on single card or smarthphone.

And they are not afraid of a complete collapse for 2 reasons :
a) Bankers (Rockefeller, Warburg etc) have highjacked the dollar in 1913 with the FED.
Before the FED existed the non-fiat dollar lost 0.5% in value in lost 137 years,
after the FED appeared the fiat dollar lost 95% in value in 100 years.
b)Besides the FED to control the systemthey have the plunge protection team to do whatever it takes to protect the system.
c) It is them who are collapsing the system,as they already did so with the great depression which was artificially created bythe FED with artificially shortening the money supply.
(there are several videos of Milton Friedmann confirming this “absurd conspiracy theory” )
Btw,when the fiat system is about to collapse they usually start a war.

Last edited 1 year ago by SxyxS
Reply to  Mark Shulgasser
October 18, 2021 4:21 pm

Mark Carney is an advisor to the Climate Change Charter.

Take a look at how many universities signed on in Canada.

James F. Evans
October 18, 2021 1:09 pm

Follow the money… and academic propensity for communism.

Juan Slayton
October 18, 2021 4:12 pm

Listening to California congresscritter Ro Khanna being interviewed on Fox this morning. Program host asking about an upcoming committee hearing featuring oil company executives: “What are you trying to learn? What are you going to ask them?”

Congressman Khanna’ response in part:
“We want to understand whether they’re engaged in any spending on climate disinformation or whether they recognize we’re in a climate crisis.”

Personally, I would like to understand how much our government is spending on climate disinformation.

October 19, 2021 7:11 am

illuminate academia’s deep role in climate industry
It doesn’t need illuminating. You have to wear sunnies all the time not to be blinded by their neon lights. Now it’s the plankton dooming-

“Changes in the distribution of plankton are expected as global temperatures continue to trend upwards. What those changes might be and where plankton might end up is the subject of a new study led by environmental physicist Fabio Benedetti of ETH Zurich in Switzerland.

He and colleagues developed global distribution maps for more than 860 species of phytoplankton and zooplankton, and then used statistical algorithms and climate models to predict the changes these communities would undergo under future climate change.”
Plankton Is Undergoing a Global Migration, With Dire Consequences For The Food Web (

You’re next for the computer modelling bacteria and look out molecules and atoms. These people are obsessive compulsives and need therapy and medication to get them away from computers before they fall easy prey to the next Pol Pot. It’s an academic pandemic that requires immediate university lockdowns and social distancing until we find a cure.

October 19, 2021 9:01 pm

Climate science doesn’t matter. It is well known that if physics is consistent over time the climate will change. It will change over geologic time. There are three cases in the next century or two: Up, Down, or about the Same.
If it is going up due to CO2, Nuclear Power generates no CO2.
If it is going down (perhaps due to natural cycles of the Sun), Nuclear Power generation will allow for electric heat as FL has weather like NY.
If it is going the same due to CO2 having no effects, Nuclear Power generation will get more power without burning fossil fuels which pollute in other ways.
One science to fix them all.

shudong zhou
October 20, 2021 12:05 am

 Enron!!!yes,just this year I find this company and what it do.History always has striking similarities. I Having worked in the so-called photovoltaic industry for 10 years, they distinguish their peers by whether they learn photovoltaic or not! But there is no manufacturing industry! In ISIC rev4.0, solar panels are electrical equipment, highly educated shameless doctors and professors steal the achievements of the manufacturing industry.

shudong zhou
October 20, 2021 12:15 am

Take the manufacturing of masks as an example. Its principle is filtration and adsorption, but there can be no filtration industry, because you can study phenomena, but you can’t turn them into manufacturing. Or in the case of glass, glass is a product and transparency is a phenomenon. In order to deceive people, you call the glass manufacturing industry transparent industry? In this way, everyone can cheat the project funds from the Fund Committee.

Geoff Sherrington
October 20, 2021 1:13 am

Chris Horner,
Please note that my font is larger than 3 point.
What a way for the Respondents to demonstrate their lack of simple civility !!

Thank you for this essay with the paperwork attached.
Without your scholarship and reporting, we would not be so aware of the degree of righteous bastardry that these people are peddling.
Now to hope for a competent judge. Geoff S

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights