The Dark Money Behind Climate Dysinformation

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Not Just the Koch Brothers: New Drexel Study Reveals Funders Behind the Climate Change Denial Effort

Key findings include:

Conservative foundations have bank-rolled denial. The largest and most consistent funders of organizations orchestrating climate change denial are a number of well-known conservative foundations, such as the Searle Freedom Trust, the John William Pope Foundation, the Howard Charitable Foundation and the Sarah Scaife Foundation. These foundations promote ultra-free-market ideas in many realms.

Koch and ExxonMobil have recently pulled back from publicly visible funding. From 2003 to 2007, the Koch Affiliated Foundations and the ExxonMobil Foundation were heavily involved in funding climate-change denial organizations. But since 2008, they are no longer making publicly traceable contributions.

Funding has shifted to pass through untraceable sources. Coinciding with the decline in traceable funding, the amount of funding given to denial organizations by the Donors Trust has risen dramatically. Donors Trust is a donor-directed foundation whose funders cannot be traced. This one foundation now provides about 25% of all traceable foundation funding used by organizations engaged in promoting systematic denial of climate change.

Most funding for denial efforts is untraceable. Despite extensive data compilation and analyses, only a fraction of the hundreds of millions in contributions to climate change denying organizations can be specifically accounted for from public records. Approximately 75% of the income of these organizations comes from unidentifiable sources.
- See more at: Not Just the Koch Brothers: New Drexel Study Reveals Funders Behind the Climate Change Denial Effort | Now | Drexel University

Looks just like the game they are playing with campaign financing! Supplying money that can't be traced back to the sources.

Wiseone · Dec 27, 2013

Its spelled "disinformation" it really doesn't help your argument to deliberately misspell words as a rhetorical device.

Mycroft · Dec 27, 2013

Wiseone said:
Its spelled "disinformation" it really doesn't help your argument to deliberately misspell words as a rhetorical device.

That's okay...he really doesn't have any argument anyway...except that he doesn't like people spending their own money on things they want to spend it on.

Paschendale · Dec 27, 2013

The strangest part is that there is obviously lots of money to be made in new technologies and new sources of energy. It's rather sad that these old men are so incapable of adapting as to take advantage of it. They're too shortsighted and seem to want to try to prevent the future coming. You can't actually do that. You either keep up or get out of the way... or you get swept under.

flogger · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
The strangest part is that there is obviously lots of money to be made in new technologies and new sources of energy. It's rather sad that these old men are so incapable of adapting as to take advantage of it. They're too shortsighted and seem to want to try to prevent the future coming. You can't actually do that. You either keep up or get out of the way... or you get swept under.

Crossing our bridges perhaps as much as a century before we need when the technologies in question are many times more expensive than current generation is in point of fact the economics of the madhouse. These guys are businessmen . If these things actually worked in the real world and could make money without huge subsidy they would be in there like a shot and no mistake

Mycroft · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
The strangest part is that there is obviously lots of money to be made in new technologies and new sources of energy. It's rather sad that these old men are so incapable of adapting as to take advantage of it. They're too shortsighted and seem to want to try to prevent the future coming. You can't actually do that. You either keep up or get out of the way... or you get swept under.

If people want to make lots of money on new technologies and new sources of energy then they are free to do so. Nothing stopping them except their own abilities.

But if you want to get the government involved...telling people what technologies and sources of energy they HAVE to use...what technologies and sources of energy they CANNOT use...then that is nothing more than government getting involved in things they don't belong in.

If people think government is doing such things...or that others want the government to do such things...then they are free to spend their money to try to prevent that.

Myself...I don't see what the big deal is.

Paschendale · Dec 27, 2013

flogger said:
Crossing our bridges perhaps as much as a century before we need when the technologies in question are many times more expensive than current generation is in point of fact the economics of the madhouse. These guys are businessmen . If these things actually worked in the real world and could make money without huge subsidy they would be in there like a shot and no mistake

Most of our technologies are created via subsidy. Most notably the internet you're using right now. Business have proven itself notoriously incapable of creating new technologies or ideas. It is only skilled at exploiting them.

flogger · Dec 27, 2013

Good grief this is now the third thread started in a week on the same study !

This is desperate stuff now as each ever more marginalised alarmist clutches at the same straw ! :shock:

flogger · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
Most of our technologies are created via subsidy. Most notably the internet you're using right now. Business have proven itself notoriously incapable of creating new technologies or ideas. It is only skilled at exploiting them.

With renewables the subsidies often cost more than the value of the power generated. This is what happens to costs when such subsidies get completely out of hand. I would not like to be a Dane !

Threegoofs · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
The strangest part is that there is obviously lots of money to be made in new technologies and new sources of energy. It's rather sad that these old men are so incapable of adapting as to take advantage of it. They're too shortsighted and seem to want to try to prevent the future coming. You can't actually do that. You either keep up or get out of the way... or you get swept under.

History has shown that people who are making money doing one thing will fight tooth and nail to keep doing it.

This is quite similar to the tobacco issue a few decades ago. Deny, deny, deny, then obfuscate and confuse, then make deals, then get exposed, then beg.

The funny thing is that the companies are starting to stop denying, but their black money is working so well they get to be on both sides of the issue!

Mycroft · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
Most of our technologies are created via subsidy. Most notably the internet you're using right now. Business have proven itself notoriously incapable of creating new technologies or ideas. It is only skilled at exploiting them.

I think, maybe, Intel, AMD, and a whole host of other companies might disagree with you about that.

Now, if you had said that businesses are notoriously reluctant to spend money on unproven or undeveloped technologies...especially if the possibility of getting any kind of return on that money is in doubt, then I would agree with you.

Paschendale · Dec 27, 2013

flogger said:
With renewables the subsidies often cost more than the value of the power generated. This is what happens to costs when such subsidies get completely out of hand. I would not like to be a Dane !

No, it's too cold there. Oh, you mean that they pay more taxes and get a whole lot more value for them than we do? Sometimes you have to pay a little more now not to pay a lot more later. That right there, that's the reason our economy is still falling. We only care about the quarterly report, and not the longterm.

Threegoofs said:
History has shown that people who are making money doing one thing will fight tooth and nail to keep doing it.

To the detriment of all.

Mycroft said:
I think, maybe, Intel, AMD, and a whole host of other companies might disagree with you about that.

Now, if you had said that businesses are notoriously reluctant to spend money on unproven or undeveloped technologies...especially if the possibility of getting any kind of return on that money is in doubt, then I would agree with you.

... That's what I said. Until public money proves the technology, the business folks won't touch it. They don't innovate until someone else does the legwork. Until we, the public, pay for it. Until return is guaranteed, they don't act. They don't create, they only exploit.

Mycroft · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
... That's what I said. Until public money proves the technology, the business folks won't touch it. They don't innovate until someone else does the legwork. Until we, the public, pay for it. Until return is guaranteed, they don't act. They don't create, they only exploit.

Like I said, a whole lot of companies would disagree with you.

A multigate device or multiple gate field-effect transistor (MuGFET) refers to a MOSFET (metal–oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistor) which incorporates more than one gate into a single device. The multiple gates may be controlled by a single gate electrode, wherein the multiple gate surfaces act electrically as a single gate, or by independent gate electrodes. A multigate device employing independent gate electrodes is sometimes called a Multiple Independent Gate Field Effect Transistor (MIGFET). Multigate transistors are one of several strategies being developed by CMOS semiconductor manufacturers to create ever-smaller microprocessors and memory cells, colloquially referred to as extending Moore's Law.[1]

Development efforts into multigate transistors have been reported by AMD, Hitachi, IBM, Infineon Technologies, Intel Corporation, TSMC, Freescale Semiconductor, University of California, Berkeley and others and the ITRS predicts that such devices will be the cornerstone of sub-32 nm technologies.[2] The primary roadblock to widespread implementation is manufacturability, as both planar and non-planar designs present significant challenges, especially with respect to lithography and patterning. Other complementary strategies for device scaling include channel strain engineering, silicon-on-insulator-based technologies, and high-k/metal gate materials.

Dual gate MOSFETs are commonly used in VHF mixers and in sensitive VHF front end amplifiers. They are available from manufacturers such as Motorola, NXP, and Hitachi.

~

Tri-gate or 'Transistor (not to be confused with 3D microchips) fabrication is used by Intel Corporation for the nonplanar transistor architecture used in Ivy Bridge and Haswell processors. These transistors employ a single gate stacked on top of two vertical gates allowing for essentially three times the surface area for electrons to travel. Intel reports that their tri-gate transistors reduce leakage and consume far less power than current transistors. This allows up to 37% higher speed, or a power consumption at under 50% of the previous type of transistors used by Intel.[16][17]

Intel explains, "The additional control enables as much transistor current flowing as possible when the transistor is in the 'on' state (for performance), and as close to zero as possible when it is in the 'off' state (to minimize power), and enables the transistor to switch very quickly between the two states (again, for performance)."[18] Intel has stated that all products after Sandy Bridge will be based upon this design.

Intel was the first company to announce this technology. In September 2002,[19] Intel announced their creation of 'Triple-Gate Transistors' to maximize 'transistor switching performance and decreases power-wasting leakage'. A year later in September 2003, AMD announced it was working on similar technology at the International Conference on Solid State Devices and Materials.[20][21] No further announcements of this technology were made until Intel's announcement in May 2011 although it was stated at IDF 2011, that they demonstrated a working SRAM chip based on this technology at IDF 2009.[22]

On April 23, 2012 Intel released a new line of CPUs, termed Ivy Bridge, which feature tri-gate transistors.[23][24] Intel has been working on its tri-gate architecture since 2002, but it took until 2011 to work out mass production issues. The new style of transistor was described on May 4, 2011, in San Francisco.[25] Intel factories are expected to make upgrades over 2011 and 2012 to be able to manufacture the Ivy Bridge CPUs.[26] As well as being used in Intel's Ivy Bridge chips for desktop PCs, the new transistors will also be used in Intel's Atom chips for low powered devices.[25]

The term tri-gate is sometimes used generically to denote any multigate FET with three effective gates or channels.

Multigate device - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No government inducement happening here, folks. Just businesses seeing an opportunity to make more money and doing the R&D to make it happen.

And this is just ONE piece of technology. I'm sure there are others and the businesses involved in those areas would disagree with you, as well.

Sorry to burst your anti-business, pro-government, factually-inaccurate bubble.

Bob Blaylock · Dec 27, 2013

The “environmentalists” are showing their true colors; revealing what the more discerning of us have known all along.

It has never been about protecting the Earth, or the environment or whatever.

It has always been about making excuses for government to become bigger, more intrusive, and more burdensome.

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Wiseone said:
Its spelled "disinformation" it really doesn't help your argument to deliberately misspell words as a rhetorical device.

I didn't spell wrong deliberately. I didn't notice I spelled the title wrong until after I posted....maybe it happened because I had just been writing "dysfunctional" too many times elsewhere.

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
The strangest part is that there is obviously lots of money to be made in new technologies and new sources of energy. It's rather sad that these old men are so incapable of adapting as to take advantage of it. They're too shortsighted and seem to want to try to prevent the future coming. You can't actually do that. You either keep up or get out of the way... or you get swept under.

Over 100 years ago, there was a serious, hostile effort made by Western Union to stop the newly invented telephone from getting widely distributed, so they could keep their old telegraph messaging systems running and turning profits. They tried to buy up Alexander Graham Bell's fledgling company and the patents, and just leave them on the shelf until they decided it was time to introduce the new technology. As history turned out, it was the financial backers of Bell's new invention who bought up Western Union. Worth noting that they maintained the old telegram system and paper tape stock tickers running for decades afterwards. Once they owned the old technology, they had a vested interest in keeping it running also....if that correlates any with oil companies trying to squeeze the last drops of carbon fuels out of the ground.

Of course the obvious difference is that there wasn't any significant difference in environmental impacts between the telephone and the telegraph, unlike carbon and post-carbon energy sources.
The only oil company to even dip its toe in the water of alternative energy so far, has been BP...when they were in their "Beyond Petroleum" green phase a few years back. Most of the campaign was smoke and mirrors, but they did put some money up for windmill and solar panel research. And then green CEO got pushed out by major shareholders complaining that their profit margins weren't big enough, and Tony Hayward was dropped in to double down on oil drilling....including cutting corners while drilling deep into the ocean floor...and then the Gulf of Mexico and the much lesser known about prior blowout in the Caspian Sea near Azerbaijan occurred, but the quest for oil goes on regardless of that and increasing energy, capital and environmental costs of getting it out of the ground.

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
Most of our technologies are created via subsidy. Most notably the internet you're using right now. Business have proven itself notoriously incapable of creating new technologies or ideas. It is only skilled at exploiting them.

Exactly! All this crap about "free enterprize" and all of the basic research in electronics, medicine, biology, physics, chemistry etc. that's needed to provide opportunists with profitable inventions, is provided by universities and public institutions like the NIH.

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Mycroft said:
I think, maybe, Intel, AMD, and a whole host of other companies might disagree with you about that.

Now, if you had said that businesses are notoriously reluctant to spend money on unproven or undeveloped technologies...especially if the possibility of getting any kind of return on that money is in doubt, then I would agree with you.

And, which one of those companies invented the internet? Same with the basic research on computers and microprocessors sponsored by NASA.

Where Big Corp comes swooping down out of the sky, is when they see something new that could turn a profit. So, they take free research from NIH and use it to make new drugs, and use genomic research to genetically engineer new seedless plants for agriculture. They have even quietly established patent rights on our own DNA! As this blog entry notes, the new profit-driven medical research regime is a far cry from the days of Jonas Salk...who declared in 1955 that his new polio vaccine was something for the benefit of all, not something to use for profit! It's a shame; he could have become a billionaire and retired a right wing hero!
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2013/04/corporations-that-own-your-dna/

Commie · Dec 27, 2013

Bob Blaylock said:
The “environmentalists” are showing their true colors; revealing what the more discerning of us have known all along.

It has never been about protecting the Earth, or the environment or whatever.

It has always been about making excuses for government to become bigger, more intrusive, and more burdensome.

No, it's about people like you who realize at some subconscious level that something big....like government making enforceable rules, is the only way to stop destruction of the environment, and lash out against any and every straw man available while throwing a tantrum resulting from their cognitive dissonance.

If your system doesn't work, you change it! The stupid thing to do is to be too dumb or too stubborn to change when danger approaches.

Paschendale · Dec 27, 2013

Mycroft said:
Like I said, a whole lot of companies would disagree with you.

No government inducement happening here, folks. Just businesses seeing an opportunity to make more money and doing the R&D to make it happen.

And this is just ONE piece of technology. I'm sure there are others and the businesses involved in those areas would disagree with you, as well.

Sorry to burst your anti-business, pro-government, factually-inaccurate bubble.

You're reading chapters 3 and 4 of the story and ignoring chapters 1 and 2. Those companies make better computers. But they never would have invented computers in the first place. That's the difference. Public enterprise creates new things. Private enterprise swoops in to refine it and get all the money once the legwork is already done. Of course, there's nothing stopping public enterprise from doing the latter step, except private enterprise's desire for more money. They steadfastly refuse to make the first steps. That always gets paid for by us.

All of the physics that allows Intel to know how to make these multi-gate devices, done at universities, paid for by research grants. The original CPUs and chips and the basic technology that allows computers to work, created with public money. Those are the facts that you are ignoring.

flogger · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
No, it's too cold there. Oh, you mean that they pay more taxes and get a whole lot more value for them than we do? Sometimes you have to pay a little more now not to pay a lot more later. That right there, that's the reason our economy is still falling. We only care about the quarterly report, and not the longterm.

Well you have been shown the madness of the economics involved here and been given real world examples (Denmarks is mainly wind not solar so cold doesnt enter into it) when countries over commit to such technologies. By all means volunteer your bills to treble or quadruple unecessarily if you like because you certainly wont save the planet by doing it. The problem I have with todays eco evangelists is they want to 'volunteer' the rest of us with them

Deuce · Dec 27, 2013

flogger said:
Well you have been shown the madness of the economics involved here and been given real world examples (Denmarks is mainly wind not solar so cold doesnt enter into it) when countries over commit to such technologies. By all means volunteer your bills to treble or quadruple unecessarily if you like because you certainly wont save the planet by doing it. The problem I have with todays eco evangelists is they want to 'volunteer' the rest of us with them

No, they want you to actually pay your share of the cost of energy. Right now, you're dumping the health, environmental, agricultural, and cleanup costs onto others. Personal responsibility, dude. Your electric bill from the coal plant doesn't account for the lung cancer it gives somebody 10 years from now.

Earthling · Dec 27, 2013

Point of interest

Commie said:
Over 100 years ago, there was a serious, hostile effort made by Western Union to stop the newly invented telephone from getting widely distributed, so they could keep their old telegraph messaging systems running and turning profits. They tried to buy up Alexander Graham Bell's fledgling company and the patents, and just leave them on the shelf until they decided it was time to introduce the new technology. As history turned out, it was the financial backers of Bell's new invention ...

Bell stole and patented the invention from Antonio Meucci, who couldn't afford the patent fee.

flogger · Dec 27, 2013

Deuce said:
No, they want you to actually pay your share of the cost of energy. Right now, you're dumping the health, environmental, agricultural, and cleanup costs onto others. Personal responsibility, dude. Your electric bill from the coal plant doesn't account for the lung cancer it gives somebody 10 years from now.

Oh I get it now . You want me to pay for your guilt trip too. I'm sorry but in this instance the indoctrination didn't take so you'll have to wear your own hair shirt. Environments in most western nations are cleaner now than at any time since WW2 so go beat up on the Chinese :roll:

Mycroft · Dec 27, 2013

Paschendale said:
You're reading chapters 3 and 4 of the story and ignoring chapters 1 and 2. Those companies make better computers. But they never would have invented computers in the first place. That's the difference. Public enterprise creates new things. Private enterprise swoops in to refine it and get all the money once the legwork is already done. Of course, there's nothing stopping public enterprise from doing the latter step, except private enterprise's desire for more money. They steadfastly refuse to make the first steps. That always gets paid for by us.

All of the physics that allows Intel to know how to make these multi-gate devices, done at universities, paid for by research grants. The original CPUs and chips and the basic technology that allows computers to work, created with public money. Those are the facts that you are ignoring.

Well, damn...excuse me for forgetting about that government caveman who invented fire, dude. LOL!! I guess the guy who figured out how to cook meat on a fire without getting himself burned just exploited the poor guy, too.

Give me a break!

The Dark Money Behind Climate Dysinformation

Well-known member

Genius is where you find it.

Uncanny

Genius is where you find it.

Uncanny

Sophisticated man-about-town

Genius is where you find it.

Uncanny

Genius is where you find it.

Electrician

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Uncanny

Outer space potato man

Genius is where you find it.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency