A couple of weeks ago, Newsweek published a front-page article demonizing ExxonMobil for given $10,000 honorariums to researchers likely to publish work skeptical of catastrophic man-made global warming.  If $10,000 is corrupting and justifies such an ad hominem attack, what are we to make of $100 million (pronounced in Dr. Evil voice with pinkie to lips) a year in pro-catastrophe spending:

That's right, $100 million per year. Al Gore,
who seems to think it is sinister for other people to spend money in
order to communicate their ideas about sound public policy is going to
outspend the entire mass of climate policy critics tenfold in order to
spread his message of environmental catastrophism to the public.

Speech:  OK for me, but not for thee.

Postscript:  By the way, I fully support Mr. Gore and his donor's efforts to let their viewpoint be heard.  I just wonder why they don't extend me the same courtesy.


  1. Walter E. Wallis, P.E.:

    I have known engineers in industry, including one who worked for Kerr McGee, and none of them needed their job enough to lie to keep it.

  2. Rick:

    Big oil is paying the skeptics off! - ok not really but I don't think the other side will ever stop saying that and believing it.

    I had a long climate discussion with some guys on a basketball forum of all places.

    I made some solid arguments - but in the end it was all over ruled by consensus science and big oil pay off theory.

    I won't bother with this debate anymore - can't win.

  3. la petite chou chou:

    The reason you don't get the same courtesy is because the world is riddled with double-standards.