Every time a climate expert comes out saying that maybe, just maybe, global warming isn't this huge human existential deal, there is a pile on about the poor slob having "industry funding" with the strong inference that such an opinion is moot because he or she is beholden to "dirty money" that would thus necessarily sway the results. It seems to me that this argument is a double-edged sword.
A little Memorial Day googling indicated that U.S. taxpayers spend $4 billion dollars a year in Global Warming research. It is not clear how much more private money ala Al Gore etc. is added to that funding... at least $350 million in PR as per their press release.
Also controversial and difficult to find is the number of climatologists in the world. One source claims 31,000, but, as another pointed out, this means that every climate program on earth churns out 10 per year that stay in the profession. The 31,000 number is touted by its progenitor as "vetted scientists and engineers".
So at least 4 billion dollars going to as many as 31,000 S&E's "researching" Global Warming. That is a funding rate of a little more than $130,000 per year per S&E researcher that is actually de facto contingent on the existence of a Warming Crisis.
Makes ExxonMobil's $181,000 contribution that invalidated a research group's conclusions seem pretty paltry, doesn't it? Following the money is a handy tool. Make no mistake, Global Warming Alarmism is a huge industry, whether it is true or not.
Choke, the rub here is that ExxonMobil has funded 43 groups that seek to disprove global warming. It looks very much like what Big Tobacco did 40 years ago. Things are changing. Even ExxonMobil believes global warming is occurring. Following is a quote from Kenneth P. Cohen, ExxonMobil VP Public Affairs:
"the global ecosystem is showing signs of warming, particularly in polar areas" and "the appropriate debate isn't on whether the climate is changing but rather should be on what we should be doing about it."
Posted by: Scott | May 27, 2008 at 09:49 AM
Then Mr. Cohen mis-spoke. Certainly warming and attendant ice melting is taking place in the arctic circle. Alternatively, cooling and thickening is taking place in the antarctic. Is there anthropogenic warming? You bet. Concrete and pavement via reflection and surface rather than atmospheric temps. Regulating carbon doesn't affect this one whit.
Posted by: Open Choke | May 29, 2008 at 09:52 PM