CD Quality of this Radio Ecoshock report (56 MB) here:
The fossil fuel industry have teamed up with very wealthy idealogues to make you doubt global warming is happening, or that we are forcing big changes in the climate.
For years, we guessed and partly knew that a small group of Right-wing think tanks, weathermen, and bloggers, and even a couple of low-grade climate scientists, were being paid off. We just couldn't see through the corporate veil of deception.
Now we know many of the same people hired by the tobacco industry to create doubt that smoking killed millions of people, found a new source of funding, and a new cause. They are attacking climate science, and the scientists. Hidden money fuels a campaign of lies, inuendo, fear mongering and fake science.
In recent news, we finally got hard information on just who is paying for these attacks, and how the money flows out to so-called independent "experts" and bloggers. A well-known scientist, Peter Gleick, penetrated the secret funding sources for climate attack central - an alleged charity called "The Heartland Institute".
We didn't really need the Heartland emails, leaked to desmogblog.com. Another source, Dr. John Mashey, patiently analysed public documents to track it all down. In an exclusive radio interview, John Mashey lays out the conspiracy, and names names.
Here is a link to John Mashey's blog,
and here is where to download his 200 page PDF documentation, showing the donors, the front groups, and the propaganda machine of climate denial.
Here are some more good links, and a bit of a transcript, if you want to follow up on the Heartland funding of "scientists" like Dr. Fred Singer (who spoke for the tobacco industry, and now gets $$$ to speak against climate science) and other bloggers and fake experts.
Read this George Monbiot article in the UK Guardian from February 20th. George captures what is happening: plutocrats are taking over our governments and trying to control our minds (not to mention what our kids are taught in school). "We need to know who funds these thinktank lobbyists"
The Heartland money also went to climate deniers in New Zealand, Australia and Canada. People are still checking out connections to the UK.
FROM THE RADIO ECOSHOCK SHOW interview with Dr. John Mashey.
"Alex Smith: I see from your charts, and it was echoed in the leaked documents, the Heartland Institute received millions from a single anonymous donor. Do we have any clue who that is?
John Mashey: Oh yeah. It's pretty well in the [years of Heartland Institute] blogs. And it is something I almost included [in his 200 page report] but I still had some work to do, to track things down.
The leaked information helped remove certain possibilities. I would suggest that there is a huge amount of evidence that it's, and I don't know how to pronounce it, it's Barre Seid from Chicago area.
There's a whole pattern of him giving to Heartland for years, and then through his foundation, at least back through 1999. But around 2005 he disappears. There's a funny thing in 2005-2006 where a whole lot more money comes in, but then the next year it goes out to a bunch of different other non-profits.
Heartland had never done that before or afterwards. One of them was to a place called Shimer college, and it turns out there was a takeover attempt, sort of run by Seid, with a new Board, or attempting to have a new Board which was mostly people who worked for Seid, or people who were funded by Seid.
And then later, what happens is the money comes to Shimer College through this Donors Trust/Donors Capital combination. That entity also supplied a lot of money to Heartland. It's a big boost, came through Donors.
I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, but I would bet, you know there's nobody else that fits, and in particular the other possibilities were all named as named donors in the [leaked] funding document, which says, you know, [they are?] pretty unlikely."
Check out this Daily Kos expose, with tons of links, on Barre Seid's alleged take-over of a Shimer College in the U.S. (with $17 million dollars, also going through the anonymous "Donors' Trust" that donated lots of money to the Heartland Institute and other climate denial organizations).
A list of some of Seid's past donations here. It's a mix of real charities, and the usual right-wing think tanks and suspects.
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT SCIENTISTS MUZZLED
In Canada, the Prime Minister represents "the oil patch" of Alberta. He pushes the Tar Sands. His government issued draconian new rules that make it pretty well impossible for government climate scientists, ocean experts, and more - to speak to the public.
Canadian government scientists are often forbidden to speak to the press, even after publishing studies in major international journals. We'll hear three shocking cases explained by Canada's top science reporter, Margaret Munro. That is from her presentation at the 2012 American Academy for the Advancement of Science Panel "Unmuzzling Government Scientists" in Vancouver February 17th, as recorded by aven.com - the Audio Visual Education Network. You can order almost all of the talks from the AAAS 2012 conference from Aven - and there are some great presentations.
In one case, a Canadian government scientist who published about a flood in Canada's North 13,000 years ago was forbidden to speak about his scientific study. Is it because the ultra-Christians in Harper's government believe the world is only 6,000 years old, in their interpretation of the Bible?
Another scientist, Dr Kristi Miller, head of molecular genetics for the Department for Fisheries and Oceans, found a virus in wild fish. That was inconvenient for the lucrative farmed fish market. Although the international press were promised an interview with Miller - that never happened. Find out more in this BBC article on Canada muzzling it's scientists.
In fact, the Deputy Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Claire Dansereau, was supposed to speak at this AAAS Panel. It's printed in the conference listings. She didn't show up. The presenters left an empty chair where the government of Canada was supposed to be.
THE BATTLE OF "KEYSTONE NORTH" - THE OTHER ENBRIDGE TAR SANDS PIPELINE
Here is another crazy example.
The environmental regulators, the supposedly neutral government called opponents of the proposed Enbridge northern pipeline unpatriotic foreign-funded radicals. These "radicals" include pretty well every aboriginal nation along the route from the Tar Sands, and a majority of Canadians opposed to the pipeline. To make sure no one talks too much at the environmental impact hearings, the government imposed Orwellian rules.
In Procedural Directive #4, the Panel ruled oral evidence should not include:
* technical or scientific information;
* opinions, views, information or perspectives of others
* detailed information on the presenter’s views on the decisions the Panel should make or detailed opinions about the Project;
* recommendations whether to approve or not approve the Project and the terms or
conditions that should be applied if the Project were to proceed;
* or questions that the presenter wants answered.
In other words, just shut up! Maybe you can talk about the weather. No facts, science, or questions allowed. Presenters, including First Nations People whose salmon streams will be crossed by the Enbridge pipeline, get just 5 minutes to speak.
Presenter and Federal Member of Parliament Nathan Cullen, whose riding is most impacted by the would-be Tar Sands pipeline, was repeatedly interupted and silenced by these rules of procedure.
DO AMERICAN SCIENTISTS HAVE FREEDOM TO SPEAK?
It's not just Canada.
The right of scientists to speak out has improved slightly in the United States, since George Bush gave way to the Obama administration. Francesco Grifo from the Union of Concerned Scientists reveals how information important to your safety was suppressed by industry lobbyists.
This is still happening. Grifo gives examples of toxic substances, dangerous to the health of consumers, that were recommended to be banned by government science studies. When it gets to the top of the Agency, or the White House, the necessary rules are dropped or stalled, by industry lobby groups.
In some departments, new rules are allowing scientists like James Hansen to exercise their First Amendment rights, to speak freely about their own views.
The out-going President of the AAAS, Dr. Nancy Fedoroff, told a press conference in Vancouver:
"Belief systems, especially when tinged with fear, are not easily dispersed with facts."
She said, as a result of a campaign of misinformation through the mainstream media and the Net, in America "fewer people believe in climate change each year."
Federoff told reporters: "I'm scared to death, because that obviously stalls what we need to be doing to adapt to climate change." She continued: "We are sliding back into a dark era."