VXerick: I like your use of the term "general population". Take note, that people who go to school and get degrees in the sciences and engineering and go to work in the fields of their choice are quite part of the "general population". I know no climate scientist or engineer involved in these or related sciences who would opt for buying a $50 light bulb, but somehow the entire climate denial industry has convinced a lot of people in the "general population" who have not gone to school and gotten degrees and worked in these fields, or studied them through trained eyes, that it's all about funding, and therefore every university scientist, industrial scientist, NASA scientist, government and unitversity scientists from all over the world, are in one vast global conspiracy.

I pointed out that the Heartland Institute, the one that paid "scientists" in its long-standing association with the tobacco industry, to deligitimatize the scientific belief in the dangers of smoking, has now turned its attention to delegitimatize the work of far more scientists around the world in climate change. The have paid incredible sums, far in excess of the typical university researcher's salary, for their "scientists" to cherry pick the data, much as the Heartland Institute tobacco scientists did, and mislead the non-scientific public. And the non-profit Hearland Institute has been well-funded by conservative groups with very very deep pockets.

So from that perspective you are correct. The Heartland Institute has received considerable funding from various sources, and paid people far more than universities and government agencies to delegitimatize the work of legitimate scientists and engineers around the world. Follow the money, VXerick and Media. Follow the money. Amazing how the Heartland Institute hired lawyers to see to it that they can remain a "non-profit" and not publically report the salaries of their "researchers" anymore, eh? I also find it amazing that if you look up the background of their "Research Fellows", that the ones who write the public reports and who appear in public to represent them have no scientific background or training at all - they are lawyers.

Look it up. John made the mistake of posting a video of a "Heartland Insitute Research Fellow" who is a lawyer and no scientist (who, by the way, if you do the research, worked for Enron prior to joining the Heartland Institute - just pointing out the man's history). Notice how NASA does not send lawyers to testify before Congress - they send their scientists. See the difference?  Also note that Fox News, of course, introduced him as a "Researcher".  Why couldn't they instroduce him as an attorney?  Someone trying to mislead us, maybe?

It has been said that the climate denial insustry, spaerheaded by The Heartland Insititute, is reliant on a kind of magic. "Professional deceivers create an illusion that settled science is somehow unsettled. That certainly is somehow uncertain. And even in some cases, by selecting and distorting real research, and making it appear to say precisely the opposite of what it really says."  Based on my own observations, I could not have said it any better.

I have given examples of all three of those throughout my posts, but would be happy to consolidate them if you wish for review. I am going to be out of pocket soon for awhile, however, or at least not have a lot of time. But I would be happy to answer any specific questions.

Perstare et praestare. Per aspera ad astra.

Last Edited By: Florida Jeff 03/28/12 10:16 PM. Edited 2 times.