Climate change sceptics plan to ‘brainwash’ US children climate
Chris Rapley: 'Chilling' report into Heartland Institute funding
DOCUMENTS from an organisation known to promote climate change scepticism have emerged which reveal it has high-profile backers, including Microsoft and the US Chamber of Commerce.
The leaked fundraising and strategy documents for the Heartland Institute, which have not been confirmed to be authentic, show that one anonymous individual donated $8.6 million (£5.5m) in the past four years.
They also spell out plans to roll out a programme of infiltrating school curriculums in the United States to spread doubt among teachers about the “alarmist” science behind climate change.
Among dozens more donors identified in the documents are Koch oil billionaires, PepsiCo, Pfizer, General Motors Foundation and RJR Tobacco.
Climate scientists in Britain said the documents reveal for the first time the sources and scale of funding for one of the most active US lobby groups that promotes the undermining of established climate change science.
Chris Rapley, Professor of Climate Science at University College London, said: “Assuming that the leaked documents are genuine, the most chilling revelation is the campaign to brainwash American children by commissioning an alternative curriculum aiming to undermine climate science.
“This strikes at the very roots of truth and freedom in a democratic society, something I would have felt the American people would find abhorrent.”
The documents spell out that the foundation will spend $100,000 spreading the message in schools that “shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain – two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science”.
The documents were revealed by DeSmogBlog, a blog that describes itself as focusing on “fact-based information regarding global warming misinformation campaigns”. It said it had received the confidential documents from an “insider” at the Heartland Institute, which is based in Chicago.
The institute, founded in 1984, has built a reputation for providing a forum for climate change sceptics and hosting conferences of climate science doubters in New York and Washington.
Dr Richard Dixon, director of WWF Scotland, said: “Set out here in calm tones we have plans to spend millions of dollars spreading lies and creating the false impression of doubt to children, politicians and the media.”
The “2012 Fundraising Plan”, marked as “Confidential. Please Do Not Circulate”, spells out that the organisation plans to raise $7.7m in 2012, approximately 70 per cent more than 2011.
In a table, the US Chamber of Commerce is down for a $25,000 donation in 2010, Microsoft Foundation for $59,908 in 2011, while dozens of other businesses and individuals donated between $10,000 and $330,000.
Dave Reay, a senior lecturer in carbon management at the University of Edinburgh, said: “The suggested involvement of Microsoft as a funder is especially shocking given the excellent work the Gates Foundation currently does in addressing the impacts of climate change in the developing world.”
The Heartland Institute was not available to comment last night.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 73 comments to this article
Page 1 of 5
Charles11
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 01:56 PM#70. What scientific qualificaions do you possess? Judging by your comments I would say NONE.
tested
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 09:09 AMSee Slioch is still on his (or her) AGW rant while trying to pretend that they are just some caring individual with no connection to any of the numerous organisations who are making healthy profits from scaremongering the population. Well if you really are just a caring individual then you are cerifiable as no rational person would spend so much time and effort trying to convince people on a messageboard that a theory(AGW) is actually a fact. Much better (and saner) minds are lined up on each side of the divide and as yet no one can claim to have proved whether climate change is natural, anthropogenic or a mixture of both. If, on the other hand, you are a member or employee (or both) of one of the many vested interests including the pseudo political "environmental" groups then your opinions should be dismissed as biased.
Slioch.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 08:54 AM#68 Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head exclaimed "Slioch .... you have no respect for our intelligence". ................................................................................................................... Well, I wouldn't have put it quite so bluntly myself, but if you insist ... . But, actually, it is not so much lack of intelligence as lack of an open mind with which you are afflicted. You are an ideologue and, like Charles, you dismiss anything that conflicts with your ideology without ever considering the evidence and reasons for so doing. You have no respect for truth: you merely believe what you want to be true, because to accept the contrary evidence would bring your fantasy world-view crashing to the ground. That would be painful for you, and you wish to avoid pain.
Slioch.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 08:46 AM#66 Charles11 .......................................... I commented earlier on your modus operandi of continually making false assertions - simply moving on as each was shown to be false, whilst learning nothing. You now exhibit another aspect of how you protect yourself from things that you don't want to be true: you merely label anything that threatens your sense of well-being as "rubbish", without any analysis, understanding or counter-evidence to support your dismissal. Indeed, you offer no reasons at all: you are simply an ignorant and scientifically illiterate person who has fixed ideas that are immune to reason and evidence, yet think that you know better than the overwhelming authority of the scientific community, including the scientific academies of every nation on Earth, whose results and conclusions are the source of what I write in these columns. ...... I suggest you look up 'Dunning–Kruger effect' in Wiki and then look in the mirror. ..................................................................................................................... I asked you to go back to your 'science master' to quantify and substantiate his false claims, but of course, you don't respond. IF he exists, then you could alternatively ask him to log-on himself, so that I can query him directly. But, of course, I have no confidence that you would do so.
Charles11
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 07:45 PM#67. Your so right. Where there's a scam somebody is making a lot of money.
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 05:13 PMAnd Slioch.... Please stop posting all your meaningless propaganda. either you are winding us up or you have no respect for our intelligence. Either way, please cease and desist.
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 05:11 PMSo when an organisation speaks out against the myth of man-made climate change it is "brainwashing" is it? I wonder what promoting the myth of man-made climate change could be called? The signs of propaganda are so plain that it would take a lobotomised ostrich not to see them. The anti-smoking bigots accuse those who disagree with them of being a "mouthpiece for tobacco companies". The anti-drink brigade accuse those who disagree with them of being "irresponsible". The speed camera brigade accuse those who disagree with them as being a "danger on the road". ......... Does snyone else see a common thread running through here?
Charles11
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 11:42 AMSlioch. IF you have no financial interests in global warming, why do you continue to post all this rubbish?
unimpressedone
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 10:09 AMThe Heartland Institute is sueing those publications using this fraudulent material. I wonder what Ms Failed thinks about being duped into using fake stories to boost this rag's readership?
Slioch.
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 09:02 AM#63 Charles11 .... "So you are paid to spread such rubbish?" ...........................................................................................................................That does not follow from what I have said, nor is it the case. .............................. How are you getting on asking your "science master" to quantify and provide evidence and reason for his previous assertions?
Charles11
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 09:02 PM#61. So you are paid to spread such rubbish?
Slioch.
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 08:35 PMRead this, and realise how much you have been manipulated, and by whom: .......................................... http:\\www.guardian.co.uk\science\2012\feb\19\science-scepticism-usdomesticpolicy ..... (replace backward slashes with forward) ....................................................................................................... "Last week Nina Fedoroff, the president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), .... confessed that she was now "scared to death" by the anti-science movement that was spreading, uncontrolled, across the US and the rest of the western world. "We are sliding back into a dark era," she said. "And there seems little we can do about it. I am profoundly depressed at just how difficult it has become merely to get a realistic conversation started on issues such as climate change or genetically modified organisms." "
Slioch.
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 07:52 PM#60 Charles11 ........ If it is rubbish, why should anyone pay me to write it?
Charles11
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 04:47 PMSlioch. Are you paid to post all this rubbish or are you so simple that you are easily conned?
Slioch.
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 02:27 PM#58 Charles .... It appears speaking to a science master may be the high point of your scientific education. .............. I rely on peer-reviewed science and original data, both of which I can (mostly) recognise, understand and interpret. I can also recognise complete garbage sites, such as that by Monte Heib of geocraft that you fell for. .............................................................................................................................. Being scientifically illiterate and ignorant is no disgrace: a large proportion of the population, even in the supposedly advanced societies like Europe and the USA, could be described as such. What is not acceptable (in such an important area as global warming) is the anti-science ignorance and refusal to learn that you display. Your "science master" would have done you a greater service if he had directed you to a source of general scientific education, which, if you had taken advantage of it would have been of more benefit to you. ......................................................................................................................However, since your science master has made the assertion "that man can only be responsible for a tiny amount of any cooling or warming", perhaps you could go back to him and ask him, 1. what does he mean by a "tiny amount" and over what time scale? ie quantify his assertion, 2. what is his evidence and reasoning for that assessment, and what is its source? ................................................ You might also ask him to put his hyperbole "global warming is a load of rubbish" into scientific language and quantify exactly what he means by it. ............................................................................................ I will be happy to come back and address this further information should it be forthcoming.
Page 1 of 5
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.