4 ms·

" these companies have spent well over 100 million in recent years for propaganda, and a grand total of ONE grant of 200K for scientific research." Prove it.

by MCRed 11y ago

" these companies have spent well over 100 million in recent years for propaganda, and a grand total of ONE grant of 200K for scientific research." Prove it. Prove they have spent that much on "propaganda" and that they have spent no more than 200k for research. Now prove that the government has spent more on research, and that ALL of that research was of the "free inquiry" type (Eg: without a required outcome predetermined. Remember government has pressured scientists to reach certain conclusions, and journals have set out a particular hypothesis as fact for all articles, etc. Suppression of scientific inquiry is at a shocking level these days.) Also, please tell me how much has been spent on propaganda by proponents of AGW. I know just a few of Obama's and Gore's efforts alone were more than 200M (Obama spends 200M on a week long trip oversease-- every time he's gone overseas to promote the global warming theory he's spent more in propaganda than you claim the whole industry opposing him has.)

ocschwar 11y ago
"Prove they have spent that much on "propaganda" and that they have spent no more than 200k for research." The 200K went to Richard Muller at Berkeley. I challenge you to find any other money. As for the $100M, here's $80M from one source, (freres Koch). The remaining $20M takes a bit more googling. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-an... [update] I love how I'm being challenged to prove a negative. If you can find any grant besides the Berkeley BEST grant, you will have disproved it. Go ahead and try. And BTW, I have no downvotes. I've been "too fasted" myself.
- MCRed 11y ago
  Nope, you made the claim. You need to back it up. Also, mister just-created-a-throwaway account, thanks for the down votes from you and your cronies. It says a lot more than anything you've provided on this thread.

by MCRed 11y ago

ocschwar 11y ago

"Prove they have spent that much on "propaganda" and that they have spent no more than 200k for research." The 200K went to Richard Muller at Berkeley. I challenge you to find any other money. As for the $100M, here's $80M from one source, (freres Koch). The remaining $20M takes a bit more googling. http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/polluterwatch/koch-industries/ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/global-warming-an... [update] I love how I'm being challenged to prove a negative. If you can find any grant besides the Berkeley BEST grant, you will have disproved it. Go ahead and try. And BTW, I have no downvotes. I've been "too fasted" myself.

MCRed 11y ago
Nope, you made the claim. You need to back it up. Also, mister just-created-a-throwaway account, thanks for the down votes from you and your cronies. It says a lot more than anything you've provided on this thread.