The Climate Funding Trough; The Canadian Example: Misuse of Funding By Environment Canada

-- (historic), Commentary, Environment, Uncategorized

Exposure of corrupt climate science and fraudulent claims has completely upended the climate debate. Now the climate skeptics and deniers are those who pushed the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) claim. Falsely accused of receiving oil company money, I know how they used funding to smear people.  In reality, almost all the funding came from government and because of the political objective went to block science and promote propaganda. The US Department of Energy (DOE) and other government agencies provided a portion of the approximately $21 million research funding obtained by climate researchers at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia.

Joanne Nova provided a detailed analysis of US funding in a study for the Science and Public Policy Institute and put the figure at $79 billion since 1998.

Now, politicians aware that misuse of tax money angers, scramble to address the issue while avoiding accusations that they don’t care about the environment. They won’t escape those accusations but leadership is about making tough, fair, and logical decisions.

In a legitimate and necessary action, Prime Minister Harper has stopped funding government agencies used to promote biased and false climate science.

Source:

How Canadians Funded False Climate Science

A Calgary Herald (February 23) article, “Canadian climate scientists fight for renewed research funding,” tells a far from complete story. It claims a petition signed by 1,400 students and researchers demands new funding for the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences (CFCAS), which they say will die otherwise. There’s the usual emotional appeal; “The foundation’s projects at universities across the country, which are seen as key to understanding the remarkable change underway in the climate, are already being dismantled. And young scientists, trained at substantial cost to the taxpayers, have begun leaving the country in search of work.” But there are no remarkable changes in the climate except in the falsified reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and nothing to support the claim of students leaving the country. The article provides no background of how and why the Foundation was created, which is essential to understanding the story.

Why the Funding Agency Was Established

Environment Canada set up CFCAS as just one program to control climate research and funding. Gordon McBean was Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of Environment Canada (EC) in 2000 when $61 million was assigned to CFCAS. He became Chairman of the Foundation in the month he retired from EC and continues in that position today. A further $50 million was given in 2004.

McBean had extensive involvement in the exposed climate fiasco.  He chaired the 1985 meeting in Villach, Austria, that established the IPCC. Phil Jones, now deposed and discredited Director of the CRU and his predecessor Tom Wigley were also in attendance. Both were at the heart of the corruption of climate research exposed in the leaked emails. They also controlled the IPCC process by assuring Lead Author (LA) status for CRU and affiliated people for critical chapters in the Science Report (Working Group I) including atmospheric chemistry, paleoclimates, and computer models. Most important was their control of the science provided to politicians in the Summary for Policymakers group. The Herald article says, Andrew Weaver, Canadian computer modeler,  “likens last fall’s no-cash extension to postponing critical life-saving surgery.” Weaver was LA of the modeling chapter of the IPCC Reports and his name appears in the leaked emails.

McBean joined EC in 1994, and promoted total acceptance of the IPCC Reports while the Department excluded climate scientists marginalized as skeptics. Former Minister of Natural Resources David Anderson announced he’d consulted all Canadian climate experts on Kyoto. Eight of us went to Ottawa and held a press conference to say none of us were included.  Sixty of us wrote a letter to Prime Minister Harper asking for inclusion and open debate on the issue – nothing happened. 

Money went to research proving the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory, thus thwarting the normal scientific method that tries to disprove the theory. As Princeton Physicist William Happer says about the theory, “It’s not falsifiable. Serious scientists, when they look at this, say this is an example of a theory that cannot be falsified and a theory that cannot be falsified is not science. It’s religion.” Money also went to agencies promoting the AGW claim and programs aimed at reducing greenhouse gases, specifically CO2 and methane. Trouble is, they were unnecessary because neither CO2 nor methane are causing warming or climate change. Because of their involvement with IPCC, Environment Canada didn’t want to know. They made it national policy despite the evidence of corruption and falsity of the science.

Misuse of Funding By Environment Canada

Money to support the singular approach to climate research came from department funding diverted from other uses. Weather stations were closed; Canada has fewer stations now than in 1960. Many were converted to Automatic Weather Observing Stations (AWOS) so unreliable that NavCanada initially rejected them when they took charge of airports. Services were curtailed and data was restricted or only available with payment. The Assiniboine River Management Advisory Board (ARMAB) was told by the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA) Environment Canada wanted several thousand dollars for a single DVD of weather data for research to “drought proof” the Prairies. Environment Canada employees sought and competed with private companies for contracts. Canadian National and Canadian Pacific used two EC employees when sued for non-delivery of grain by the Canadian Wheat Board. These and other diversions from primary goals caused complaints that triggered public inquiries.

Environment Canada funding was directed to research that studied the impact of global warming.  The IPCC Technical or Science Report of Working Group I incorrectly claims warming is due to CO2.  The major project the Herald article cites, “studies interactions governing the climate and how to adapt to coming change that could transform large swaths of Canada.” So all EC research assumes the world is warming but the world is cooling and has for 15 years as Phil Jones now concedes. Taxpayers are now expected to continue funding research based on incorrect and falsified science preparing us for the wrong threat.

Prevention of Further Waste Is Necessary

Could this be avoided? Absolutely! All you need to understand is why and how the process was set up. Maurice Strong told Elaine Dewar he could not achieve his goal of getting rid of the industrialized nations as a politician, but could get all the money he wanted and not be accountable through the UN. He set up the IPCC and used the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) to get access to the weather services in each country. They then diverted funding to the self-proclaimed national emergency of global warming. We must direct funding through agencies already established with filters necessary to eliminate any political bias or influence.

Scientific research is funded through the peer review process of NSERC (National Science Engineering & Research Council), why not all climate research? Graduate research in other areas is done through the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and the Medical Research Council (MRC). There are no guarantees, but with bureaucrats doing or controlling research funding, political bias is almost guaranteed. Environment Canada must be forced back to their mandate of collecting data and providing weather forecasts. They should not do research or have control of research funding.  The damage done to climate science and the creation of unnecessary energy and climate policies must stop. News reports require context; without it, stories like claims for more funding for CFCAS provide a completely false impression of sensible actions by a government.