Reply With Quote
It's not even summer yet. Wait your turn!
Rachael Maddow takes a look
Among the wing-nut organizations that Koch Industries support financially..
Link1) Cato Ins ute $8,450,000
2) Citizens for a Sound Economy Foundation $6,025,375
3) George Mason University $2,311,149
4) George Mason University Foundation, Inc. $2,074,893
6) Heritage Foundation, The $1,004,000
7) Ins ute for Justice $1,000,000
8) Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment $810,000
9) Reason Foundation, The $642,000
10) Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies, The $504,000
12) Ins ute for Humane Studies $455,000
13) Pacific Research Ins ute for Public Policy $385,000
14) Washington Legal Foundation $350,000
15) Capital Research Center $340,000
16) Compe ive Enterprise Ins ute $254,460
20) Ethics and Public Policy Center, Inc. $190,000
22) National Center for Policy Analysis $175,000
23) Citizens for Congressional Reform Foundation $175,000
24) Manhattan Ins ute for Policy Research, Inc. $125,000
25) American Legislative Exchange Council $120,000
26) Acton Ins ute for the Study of Religion and Liberty $115,000
28) Political Economy Research Center, Inc. $80,000
29) Media Ins ute $60,000
30) National Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship $60,000
31) University of Chicago $59,000
32) Defenders of Property Rights $55,000
33) University of Kansas Endowment Assocation $50,000
36) Texas Public Policy Foundation $44,500
37) Center for Individual Rights, The $40,000
38) Heartland Ins ute $40,000
39) Texas Justice Foundation $40,000
40) Ins ute for Policy Innovation $35,000
42) Center of the American Experiment $31,500
43) Atlas Economic Research Foundation $28,500
44) Young America's Foundation $25,000
45) Henry Hazlitt Foundation $25,000
47) Atlantic Legal Foundation $20,000
48) National Taxpayers Union Foundation $20,000
49) Families Against Mandatory Minimums $20,000
50) Philanthropy Roundtable $19,200
51) Free Enterprise Ins ute $15,000
52) John Locke Foundation $15,000
53) Hudson Ins ute, Inc. $12,650
54) Alexis de Tocqueville Ins ution $12,500
55) National Environmental Policy Ins ute $12,500
56) Washington University $11,500
57) Pacific Legal Foundation $10,000
58) American Council for Capital Formation $10,000
60) Ins ute for Political Economy $8,000
62) State Policy Network $6,500
64) Fraser Ins ute, The $5,000
65) Mackinac Center, The $5,000
66) Ins ute for Research on the Economics of Taxation $5,000
68) Ins ute for Objectivist Studies $5,000
It's not even summer yet. Wait your turn!
I wasn't aware the TPPF was a climate change denier. They focus on criminal justice.
How many of the other "wingnut" orgs focus specifically on climate change, Dan? That's a rather long list you posted. I hope you have examples for all the wingnuts you posted.
Or are we just supposed to take your word for it?
"How many of the other "wingnut" orgs focus specifically on climate change"
loaded, leading question. The list of supporters doesn't mean the supporter "focuses specifically on climate change", just that VRWC player/oil-industries Koch gave the org money.
Many orgs are desperate for money, esp now that the Banksters' Great Depression has severely crimped donations. The hurting orgs will for it. Just another way how the VRWC operates.
Vrwc?
OIC. Vast right wing conspiracy.
While I think you make a credible argument, it doesn't seem as though there's been an escalation in GW denial since the crash(es). Rather than refuting your point, the lesson may be that plenty of non-profits are happy to themselves out in good as much as bad times, regardless of political affiliation.
Nothing to see here. There's plenty of money being thrown around on both sides of the issue.
It's weird how all that money changed the temperature trend of the last decade.
Tin-foil hat required.
Tin-foil hat?
nah, the players are very well known, very public, even if, eg, Koch tries to be invisible.
I didn't believe with Hillary said VRWC back in the 90s, but Meillon Scaife, etc were already attacking the Clintons and she knew it.
The entire philosophy of the Repugs for 35+ Movement Conservative years is to destroy any Dem presidency, no matter how badly that s up the country, so the Repugs can their filthy hands back on the levers of the federal money machine.
Did any of these hired gun deniers conspire to hide data and violate freedom of information laws?
Meh, I won't attack the character of global warmists. It's much easier to attack their weak-sauce "science". I'll leave the character assassination to the left.
Carry on with your thread-sharting, boutons.
You're right. Nix the tin foil hat.
Straw hat is more appropriate.
Actually, nobody denies climate change. The issue is whether climate change of the last 100 years or so is unusual or unprecedented.
Hey, lookie what I found in one of those East Anglia emails:
I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards 'apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data' but in reality the situation is not quite so simple. We don't have a lot of proxies that come right up to date and those that do (at least a significant number of tree proxies ) some unexpected changes in response that do not match the recent warming. I do not think it wise that this issue be ignored in the chapter.
Hey propaganda Dan...
First of all, you expect me to believe the Mad Cow, then you give a link that does not go to the money you listed.
Way to Go Dan...
Great video, dan.
LMAO @ AFP being a "grassroots" organization.
lol Climate Change "deniers"
http://www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/...ate_views.aspx
When companies like Exxon start saying that the risks must be mitigated, one has to start paying attention.
"search for solutions if we are to succeed at mitigating these risks"
PR bull , spin, disinformation, Orwellian. It's like BP saying how green they were, until they failed to maintain their Alaska pipeline and very un-greenly failed.
Are you maybe reading into something you want rather than what they may mean?
What if they simply recognize they are at risk of attack if they don't appear to do something?
I wouldn't take that as a statement they actually agree with the effect that CO2 has. What if they believe like me, that CO2 is insignificant to increasing radiative forcing, but are simply putting on a good public face?
India and China are not on board with GW and co2 limits.
/game over, pointless discussion
Agreed. We could go to zero emissions, and they will still be pumping it out.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
