If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.

- George Washington

Saturday, 19 February 2011

Breaking: US kills IPCC Funding

Via JoNova, news that the US House of Representatives has voted to kill the US funding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:
Another victory for science! House votes 244-179 to kill U.S. funding of UN IPCC! 'It no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its comprehensive international climate science assessments'
Defund IPCC 'amendment was sponsored by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), who read aloud on the floor from the 2009 U.S. Senate Report of more than 700 dissenting scientists! (Written by Climate Depot's Morano)

Luetkemeyer: Americans 'should not have to continue to foot the bill for an (IPPC) organization to keep producing corrupt findings'
Luetkemeyer: Scientists manipulated climate data, suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals, and researchers were asked to destroy emails, so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.

Since then, more than 700 acclaimed international scientists have challenged the claims made by the IPCC, in this comprehensive 740-page report. These 700 scientists represent some of the most respected institutions at home and around the world, including the U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense, U.S. Air Force and Navy, and even the Environmental Protection Agency.

For example, famed Princeton University physicist Dr. Robert Austin, who has published 170 scientific papers and was elected a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Austin told a congressional committee that, unfortunately, climate has become a political science. It is tragic the some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically questionable at best.

Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse.

The alarmists are still unable to engage with the argument, but fall back on the usual boilerplate name-calling and argumentum ad hominem:
The amendment was sponsored by second-term Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), who obviously knows nothing about climate science or the IPCC, and I expect could care less. His talking points were clearly provided by some denial machine operative and Mr. Leutkemeyer simply followed the script.

Clearly, Rep. Luetkemeyer does care, or he would hardly have gone to the effort of presenting this to the House. As always, if you disagree with me, you are following a secret agenda, a line prepared by a 'machine' and you are wicked to the core. If you agree with me, you are a dispassionate and intelligent scientist whose farts smell of lavender.

Nice to see science maintaining its core of impartiality and reasonableness. Interesting times.


  1. I think it is obvious that this blog in the pay of Big Oil and under instruction to astroturf the web with disgusting denialist propaganda...

    Actually, having read a similar article on climatesciencewatch.org, I can speak authoritatively on the subject. Ahem: quotes -
    "To give you the flavor of how the know-nothings are in the saddle, here’s the debate on the amendment to de-fund the IPCC..." and
    "Speaking in opposition to the amendment, not surprisingly, was Rep. Henry Waxman, who actually does know something about the issue. This is the position now officially rejected by the House of Representatives...".

    So I'm afraid that, as you have failed to reach the right conclusion through rational debate, for your own good, it will now be necessary to re-instigate the policy of simply blowing up anyone who is ignorant enough to refute our climate change agenda.

    Yep, those warmists sure know how to put across a valid point. Really - how do you start from a position of having public goodwill, scientific opinion and half the world's politicians in your corner and still manage to lose the argument quite so badly? Something to do with zealous, self-righteous, ranting dishonesty perhaps?

  2. Couldn't have put it better myself.

    Incidentally, I am still waiting for the cheque from the Big Oil bloke.

  3. Brilliant news. Thanks for the posting.

    I don't know whether us Brit taxpayers support the pseudo-scientists, I'll have to ask my MP. And if yes, I'll try to save us a few £million.

    BTW at 17:25 tonight your posting was 5th on Google (out of 505,0000) under "ipcc funding"!!

  4. "read aloud on the floor from the 2009 U.S. Senate Report of more than 700 dissenting scientists! "

    The sun has got his hat on..., yes good news indeed and about time too. When will shiny Dave follow?

    clicked google link @joe public

  5. Yup, us gullible UK Taxpayers also fund IPCC (or at least we did last year).

    If you disagree with our politicians' generosity with our money, write to them via:-


  6. Good news indeed! My MP has a different view of "charity" than I do, so I doubt me complaining will make any difference.

  7. Joe - thanks for the Google info. Wow. I'm now on page 2, but other latecomers have joined the bandwagon :) While messing around in there, I came across this. The only surprise is that it is *ten years old*.

  8. Brilliant news!
    Now let's see if Call Me Dave can finally grow a pair and follow suit. Scrap all future 'donations' to the pointless IPCC which will also reduce our overall deficit by a tad. Win-win.

    *leaves room without holding breath*

  9. Max: waiting for CMD to grow a pair will be like waiting for the referendum we were promised with a 'cast-iron guarantee'. Continue breathing, no point in dying for a lost cause.


Comment is free, according to C P Scott, so go for it. Word verification is turned off for the time being. Play nicely.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...