Calling the Crank Tank

April 8, 2016

Very big shoe hitting floor.

The Fox News spin on what #ExxonKnew is that the evil gummint is using the power of the law to oppress free thinkers who differ from the “official” line on climate change.”
Not exactly.
What’s at issue here is whether oil companies like Exxon and Shell were actually building and planning for the climate change their scientists knew would happen, while deceiving their stockholders and investors by funding groups like Heartland Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, and, maybe the crankiest of the CrankTanks, the Competitive Enterprise Institute – to spread deception, misinformation and doubt.
CEI is home to my good buddy Chris Horner – see an example of his fine work below.

Investigations have begun in the offices of the California and New York Attorneys General, with support from a dozen other AGs.
Very loud shot across the bow of the bad ship Denial.

Inside Climate News:

The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative Washington, D.C., think tank and one of the fossil fuel industry’s most steadfast allies, disclosed on Thursday that the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands is demanding to see records of the group’s donors and activities involving climate policy.

The subpoena represents a broadening of a multifaceted legal inquiry into whether fossil fuel companies broke any laws as they sought for decades to undermine the scientific consensus and head off forceful action to address the climate crisis.

For the first time, the investigation now appears to touch on the actions of third parties supported by the industry—and perhaps into their joint lobbying actions.

CEI said it “will vigorously fight to quash this subpoena.

The island territory is just one of several jurisdictions now looking into the actions of ExxonMobil Corporation and other fossil fuel companies. The investigations, first announced by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, are thought to be in their early stages, and the investigators have offered few details of their scope.


The Virgin Islands are at great risk from sea level rise.

Turning the spotlight on CEI is an assertive tactic from a surprising quarter. The Virgin Islands, while it may not have the legal muscle of New York with its powerful securities and consumer laws, is especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

CEI said the subpoena from Attorney General Claude E. Walker “attempts to unearth a decade of the organization’s materials and work on climate change policy.”

“The subpoena requests a decade’s worth of communications, emails, statements, drafts, and other documents regarding CEI’s work on climate change and energy policy, including private donor information,” the institute said. “It demands that CEI produce these materials from 20 years ago, from 1997-2007, by April 30, 2016.”

“This is the latest effort in an intimidation campaign to criminalize speech and research on the climate debate, led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and former Vice President Al Gore,” the institute said.

Schneiderman’s subpoena of Exxon last year sparked an expanding inquiry by several Democratic attorneys general. A group of them held a press conference along with Gore last week to describe their coordinated actions on climate change, including the inquiries as well as support for the Obama administration’s climate agenda. The attorneys general of Massachusetts and California are also investigating Exxon or other fossil fuel interests.

The investigations began after InsideClimate News, and later the Los Angeles Times, as well as other journalists reported on the history of Exxon’s emerging understanding of climate change science in the 1970s and its subsequent efforts to undermine the scientific consensus, in part by financing research organizations including CEI.

CEI’s general counsel, Sam Kazman, said it was “an affront to our First Amendment rights of free speech and association for Attorney General Walker to bring such intimidating demands against a nonprofit group. If Walker and his allies succeed, the real victims will be all Americans, whose access to affordable energy will be hit by one costly regulation after another, while scientific and policy debates are wiped out one subpoena at a time.”

The inquiry’s timeframe covers a crucial period beginning in 2000 and 2001, at the start of the Bush-Cheney administration, when lobbyists from ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies were pressing the new administration to reverse Clinton-Gore policies on global warming, reject the Kyoto Protocol and overhaul government research programs into climate change.

CEI was deeply involved in this campaign, according to multiple sources, including a detailed expose by a whistleblower named Rick Piltz.

For example, CEI filed a lawsuit against both the outgoing Clinton and the incoming Bush administrations, aimed at preventing a significant review of climate science, the 2000 National Climate Assessment, from forming the basis of federal policies and international negotiations. The lawsuit was dismissed, but the CEI had made its point with the Bush administration, which continued to resist the scientific consensus endorsed by the previous administration.

At the time the Bush administration was rewriting federal climate studies, a task carried out by a former oil company lobbyist who moved into the Council on Environmental Quality under Bush, and then went to work for Exxon when his role was publicly disclosed.

Much of the White House’s engagement with the energy lobby during the early Bush-Cheney years still remains undisclosed. The administration refused to publish all its communications with the industry during its first year in office, when Vice President Dick Cheney ran an energy policy task force that consulted heavily with the industry behind closed doors.

The Virgin Islands subpoena suggests one way that some new details might be brought to light.

CEI is one of several organizations that have been repeatedly named over the years by those who have criticized Exxon and other fossil fuel companies for financing the climate denial work of third parties. After the Royal Society of the United Kingdom castigated Exxon in 2006 for giving money to groups misrepresenting climate science, Exxon said it had stopped financing the CEI.

In his remarks at last week’s press conference, Walker said the fossil fuel investigation “is not an environmental issue as much as it is about survival. We try as attorneys general to build a safe community for all. But what good is that if, annually, everything is destroyed.

“It could be David versus Goliath—the Virgin Islands against a huge corporation,” he said. “But we will not stop until we get to the bottom of this and make it clear to our residents as well as the American people that we have to do something transformational.”

Here, CEI in action, in the person of Chris Horner.

45 Responses to “Calling the Crank Tank”

  1. Gingerbaker Says:

    The disinformation campaign funded by Exxon has resulted in the delay of implementation of RE. This has increased their sales.

    How in the world can this be interpreted as “deceiving their stockholders and investors “?

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Good question. Let me try to answer. Since “stockholders and investors” buy shares in a corporation with the expectation that business will be “good”—-i.e., profits and dividends and stock value will rise so that they get a good “return” on their dirty money—-Exxon can be accused of running a scam, a Ponzi scheme where things are “good” right now but are going to tank in the future and wipe out (or at least diminish) the value of the stock. Once the SHTF and Exxon stock tanks, anyone left holding the bag has been robbed just as much as if they had a gun stuck in their face.

      Since EXXON KNEW that AGW was likely to damage its business, and hid that fact from its stockholders and investors, they are as guilty of fraud as those who sold underwater lots in Florida so many years ago.

      PS I have to chuckle at the thought that CEI is now under the gun, because Heartland will be next, and Fred Singer and Russell Cook will be gong to jail. Maybe not, though—-if Russell plays the first 30 seconds of his Heartland 2014 “speech” for the jury, they’ll give him a pass on the basis of mental incapacity. Singer will plead senility from the get-go.

      • Notice how “d.o.g.” always refers to the first 30 seconds of my presentation, and never lifts a finger to dispute what is said in the core middle section of it ( ). Not once. Ever. And notice how he actively steers y’all away from looking deeply into my blog, as though he doesn’t trust you to make your own decisions about my material. Insulting to your intelligence, don’t you think?

        Try asking “d.o.g.” to take a minimum of 5 detail points out of one of my blog posts / online articles and point you to precisely what it is that can send me to jail, so that you don’t have to go looking for these points yourselves. What will you think of the man when he can’t even rise to your own request? Surely he has 10, 20 or 100 bits of evidence he could present himself at the trial. But what if he doesn’t have a single one and then tells you where to go if you offer even the most politic criticism to him about that?

        • dumboldguy Says:


          You’re talking to yourself, Russell. No one here is going to take you up on that because they all know your game. I’ll say it YET AGAIN—-open your site to outside comments and I will spend an hour a day there crapping it up the way you crap up Crocks with your BS.

    • ubrew12 Says:

      Agree with dumboldguy. Fossil fuel is a scam, Exxon knew it. One good ice slip in Antarctica, or exceptional drought across America, and everybody else would know it too. Exxon’s been lying to their shareholders about the value of their product, and those who just rode oil down from $100/barrel to $30/barrel got ‘taken for a ride’. CEI was a part of that effort, or at least that’s what the Virgin Islands is trying to establish.

      • greenman3610 Says:

        when you make billions in profits every month that the world delays, the incentive is strong to keep it going just a little longer..

        • dumboldguy Says:

          And when you rob banks, shoplift candy bars at the 7-11, or snatch purses from little old ladies and don’t get arrested, charged, and convicted, “the incentive is also strong to keep it going just a little longer”. Crooks are crooks, no matter what scale they operate on.

          This “loud shot across the bow of the bad ship Denial” is more like a large and well-aimed torpedo that penetrated all the way to the ship’s vitals—-they are going to scream and squirm as expected, but if it goes off, they will be scrambling for the life boats (women and children last, of course—-unless they’re members of the plutocracy)

  2. ontspan Says:

    [“This is the latest effort in an intimidation campaign to criminalize speech and research on the climate debate, led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and former Vice President Al Gore,” the institute said.]

    Hmm, CEI was more then pleased with Ken Cuccinelli’s intimidating compaign to criminalize speech and research on climate change by Michael Mann and UVa. And now they don’t like it anymore?

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Yep, it’s a case of shoes on other feet, gored oxen, and pots calling kettles black, etc.—-choose your favorite idiomatic expression. I am greatly amused at the particularly loud screeching, whining, pouting, denial, and finger-pointing that conservatives engage in when caught with their pants down. I am definitely going to enjoy this movie!

  3. skeptictmac57 Says:

    Oh please, please let it be so that we (finally) get a chance to see all of the dirty dealings that CEI et al have documented in the form of secret memos and emails and other records that will shine sunlight on that nest of cockroaches.
    It won’t be easy though.They have deep pockets, and who knows how many bought politicians and judges and other people of influence that can help keep the lid on this.

    • Careful for what you wish for, friend. One of the bigger points of amusement for me is how AGW believers surround themselves with yes-men who only look for material which reinforces their preconceived beliefs, while failing abysmally to chase down items that could actually kill the whole effort instead. Ya gotta know what the all details are rather than just believe they are above reproach.

      Don’t say I didn’t warn y’all, but when the Virgin Islands AG was waving his figurative gun around in that subpoena, he inadvertently pointed it at his own head.

      • BL Brown Says:

        It’s always fun to see deniers playing the ‘I’m not denying, you are” game. It’s almost as much fun as watching them compare themselves to Galileo. But it’s been done to death, and it’s a losing game, Russell.

        • More fun in my opinion is challenging AGW believers across the board to produce specific evidence proving skeptics are paid to lie, and watching them predictably skitter away from an opportunity handed to ’em on a silver platter. I lob a beach ball at you fellows to hit into the next county Babe Ruth-style, and you don’t even take a swing at it, much less strike out.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Russell, don’t you understand that NO ONE here wants to play your stupid game? That we don’t give a rodent’s rear end about the straw man you have assembled in an attempt to distract us from the truth about AGW and the scientists who have been paid by the fossil fuel interests to lie about it? You may think you’re Brer Fox putting out a Tar Baby for us, but all you really are is a deluded loser and a denier whore with a boring one-note song.

            I will say it YET AGAIN, open up your GobofSpitfiles site to outside comments and I will attend “batting practice” there every day, even if visiting there is dangerous to one’s mental health.

      • otter17 Says:

        What are you specfically talking about? How specifically is the AG pointing the figurative gun at his own head? How is this investigation going to backfire? No probable cause or something?

        • dumboldguy Says:

          Russell never talks “specifically” about anything to do with climate change—increasing temps, acidifying oceans, melting ice—-he’s just a denier whore who earns his pay by posting bullshit on climate sites. When he posts on Crock, we laugh at him—-the morons on WUWT nod sagely and agree with him, even though he knows NOTHING about the science. I couldn’t get the Waterworld clip to play, but it’s probably just an attempt by Russell to be “cute” rather than say anything of substance.

          I would love to see him answer the three clear and “specific” questions that you asked him, but if he does, it will be a first for him.

          He instead spends his time turning arguments 180 degrees away from truth, as he did with “AGW believers surround themselves with yes-men who only look for material which reinforces their preconceived beliefs, while failing abysmally to chase down items that could actually kill the whole effort instead”. He has substituted “AGW believers” for AGW DENIERS in that sentence and tried to turn truth on its head.

          PS All should note that Russell is still hacking WordPress and awarding himself two thumbs up on his comments—-he announced a while back that he knew how to do that, and it’s a sign of his immaturity and dishonesty that he is still doing it even after he was chastised for it

          • When I post at Crocks, you characters fail every time to rise to the challenge of providing evidence that skeptics are paid to lie. That’s where the laughs really are.

            PS. I don’t hack WordPress, and Crocks is not a WordPress site. When any person deletes his/her cookies session, the site does not recognize you when you re-visit, thus you can vote up or down again as often as you like. And “d.o.g.” hasn’t figured this out yet? So, what else is he not able to grasp? That it is irrelevant what he believes about my knowledge of science, it only matters what he can prove?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Russell says, “When I post at Crocks, you characters fail every time to rise to the challenge of providing evidence that skeptics are paid to lie. That’s where the laughs really are”. Yep, he is too clueless to understand that we are really laughing at his off-key singing of the same tired old one-note song, but at least he IS aware enough to know that we’re laughing—loudly—and often. Some day he will figure out that it’s HIM and his transparent BS that we’re laughing at.

            As to his PS, (which is full of typical Russell lies, BTW).

            Crocks is NOT a WordPress site? Look again, Russell.

            You don’t hack WordPress? You ADMITTED a while back that you figured out how to give yourself multiple thumbs up—-in effect a “hack”, since it destroys the integrity of the “thumbs” system. I was one who told you that it was not possible to do any more than give ONE thumb up or down for a comment—-I invite others to try it—-come back to a comment in the same or later sessions and attempt it and you will find that you are only allowed ONE thumb vote—-you CAN change it from up to down as many times as you want, but you can’t pile them up.

            And the fact that Russell’s comments appear with two thumbs up attached the very first time they’re posted is proof that he cheats. I won’t bother to look it up, but it all goes back to when Russell was posting the picture of Jesus and the “Two Thumbs Up—-Sinclair and Cook” notation with his comments. Russell admitted to his “hacking” then, and Peter asked him to cease and desist.

            His final sentences are a classic non sequitur, crafted by Russell in an attempt to distract and divert. “So, what else is he not able to grasp? That it is irrelevant what he believes about my knowledge of science, it only matters what he can prove?”. Lord love a duck! Even the master of non sequiturs, Omnologos, couldn’t do any better (Where is Omno anyway? Has he been deported? Institutionalized?)

          • Actually, ClimateCrocks is a WordPress site, so I will correct myself on that and beat everybody to the punch. Never said I was perfect. Nonetheless, it still has the fault of allowing multiple up or down votes no matter who you are, when you delete the cookies from the browser, which I’ve constantly done for years to thwart spam and advertisement trash.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            So, Russell has had to correct himself on Crock being a WordPress site, and he now gives us more details on how he HACKS the site. I’m 2 for 2 here.

            Of course, since just about any Crocker going against Russell is like the Green Bay Packers playing the Little Sisters of the Poor, I shouldn’t gloat much.

          • “… in effect a “hack”, since it destroys the integrity of the “thumbs” system. …”

            Notice the enslavement to backpedaling when caught making an unsupportable assertion. But what to objective Crocks folks see when they look up the word hack for this context? ( ): “to gain access to a computer illegally”.

            We breathlessly await for commenter “d.o.g.”‘s evidence proving I broke into Peter’s system illegally, in roughly the same manner in which we await his proof that I wear baseball caps or that specific details within my GelbspanFiles blog or my online articles are “outright lies”.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            Russell is madly thrashing about here! LOL He now tries to play semantic games with us and cites a rather narrow definition from Merriam freakin’ WEBSTER??? And he wants to talk about “illegalities”??? LMAO!!—Russell knows less about the law than he does about climate change science, and embarrasses himself once again. Such are the dangers of being a “looker-upper”.

            Russell attempts to worm his way out of his own admission that he “hacks” (yes, we all DO understand what I meant by that) the WordPress thumbs system, i.e., he uses a technique that allows him to award multiple thumbs, either up or down, to a comment, when the WordPress system DOES NOT ALLOW THAT, at least for honest folks.

            In actuality, Russell is not trying to make any rational argument or put forth any real points here. He is just doing his “once every 7 to 10 days swing” through Crocks, making comments, and thereby getting his “denier troll” and “fossil fuel whore” cards punched so that Heartland will cut him his next paycheck. I am glad to help him do that—-better that he get fossil fuel money than be on the dole—-it would distress me greatly if I thought any of my tax dollars were ending up in Russell’s pocket.

        • Been telling y’all for a couple of years now where any such prosecution of ‘deniers’ fails, it fails on its unsupportable talking points enslavement for one thing, but the main failure is what y’all believe in but can never prove factually when asked to do so, that evidence exists proving skeptics are in an arrangement to lie over points they know are true, and were paid to do so with the understanding that the money stops when the lies stop. On the AG pointing the figurative gun at his own head, it is about the ‘enemies du jour’ he speaks of. I know where one big wipeout is. You fellows don’t even try to see if there are any faults, you just trust that all is good. Never forget, this is a two-part situation; Exxon and others supposedly ‘knew’, and they paid people to misinform the public about what they knew. This whole RICO thing is going down on that latter bit, and the stake through the heart will be what is ultimately revealed about that first notion.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            So, otter17, does all that obfuscatory BS from Russell answer your SPECIFIC questions? No? Didn’t think so—-didn’t answer mine either.

            And has everyone noticed the addition of another conditional in “prove factually when asked to do so, that evidence exists proving skeptics are in an arrangement to lie over points they know are true, and were paid to do so with the understanding that the money stops when the lies stop”. I speak of the last few words in that, and fully expect Russell to add the next time “with the understanding that you also need to prove that the moon is made of green cheese and that pigs will some day fly”. Keep moving them goalposts, Russell.

          • otter17 Says:

            No, it isn’t at all very specific, but not that it would be expected.

            It is a strawman set up that somehow folks doing the investigations or those here think that all folks in denial are paid in such a crass bribery type manner.

            The investigation likely would NOT go down on the part regarding that Exxon funded groups that held views that were counter to what their internal research was finding. That much is quite clear because Exxon has admitted openly in the past few years that they had funded such groups (some promises to stop doing so as much), plus the tax filing forms discovered showing their records for charitable giving to such groups. Multiple lines of evidence show it to be rather obvious that Exxon was NOT bribing these groups to hold a certain view, they merely sought out to donate to those groups that would AMPLIFY the size of the desired message.

            On the point of how much Exxon had known about the fossil fuel’s byproducts effect on the atmosphere, actual documents have already been uncovered, the scientists themselves have stepped forward, with probably more lines of evidence coming forward pending these investigations. Multiple lines of evidence beats flailing around and making faux-confident assertions that the AGs are pointing the figurative gun at their own heads.

          • otter17 Says:

            And Russell,

            I don’t think you will ever seek to understand it, but the folks like you are NOT necessarily being paid to hold your view of AGW. You and probably many others at Heartland or other groups very likely held those biases against the notion of AGW prior to getting any donations for outside groups and those donations haven’t likely swayed your views too much.

            The problem is, that the funding from these conflict of interests groups amplifies the message or opinions of you folks, existing outside of any scientific process rigor. That is the crux of the issue, the amplifying of such a minority view, based in political or economic bias rather than the scientific method. You may very well have come to your conclusions on your own, but that doesn’t make the conflict of interest funding to amplify the view fraught with biases any less shady.

          • “… Multiple lines of evidence show it to be rather obvious that Exxon was NOT bribing these groups to hold a certain view, they merely sought out to donate to those groups that would AMPLIFY the size of the desired message. …”

            And there, for all to see, our man “otter17” has completely blown the 20-year accusation of Al Gore’s, Ross Gelbspan’s and Naomi Oreskes’ accusation about liars-for-hire, a.k.a. the ‘denier misinformation industry’ completely out of the sky, along with the the whole current RICO push to prosecute “climate deniers”. This is as elemental as it gets: skeptic climate scientists are not corrupted when no evidence of corruption occurred. Have “otter17” yell his pronouncement through a bullhorn at a Greenpeace rally, and watch how many pitchforks get aimed in his direction.

            Think about that, along with why it is that AGW believers feel a compulsion so strong to sidestep inconvenient truths that they sidestep right into uttering statements that would get them branded as “Exxon lovers.”

            Believe all you want about ‘lines of evidence’ coming forward’ if it makes you feel better, but look yourselves in the mirror and ask yourselves whether it is not you who are making faux-confident assertions that the AGs are going to prevail when they themselves have have already been caught working with people who have long been pushing the notion that ‘big oil & coal’ paid skeptic climate scientists to lie. Pretend all you want that those exact lines of evidence don’t exist by making obfuscatory claims about them, but they are the cancer that’s eating this movement alive from within. Deal with it, and develop your exit strategy for the time when this all goes down.

            (Ps, my self-corrected misstatement on Crocks not being a WordPress site is what “d.o.g.” calls “egregiously false statements”? Can’t wait to see what he calls specific details within my GelbspanFiles blog or within my articles. Not that he plans to detail any of that to any of you good Crocks folks, of course.)

          • dumboldguy Says:

            “… Multiple lines of evidence show it to be rather obvious that Exxon was NOT bribing these groups to hold a certain view, they merely sought out to donate to those groups that would AMPLIFY the size of the desired message. …”

            It is a measure of Russell Cook’s cluelessness and general mental dullness that it has taken him ONE WHOLE MONTH to finally recognize the opportunity otter17 gave him with the thought that Russell and other deniers were not paid whores for fossil fuels but merely “friends of fossil fuels” and that the fossil fuel $$$$ that is Russell’s main income “had no strings attached” (other than the fact that it will stop instantly once Russell and the deniers stop singing the anti-AGW tune).

            Now watch Russell throw around such crap as otter’s comment leads to the”Gelbspan-Gore-Oreskes accusations being completely blown out of the sky” and the “RICO push to prosecute” along with them. I, along with other Greenpeace members, know what otter was up to when he “baited” Russell (and Russell finally bit), and we have been smiling rather than getting out our pitchforks.

            More boring yada-yada and attempts to turn the truth back on itself follow—-not worth commenting on since we’ve heard it many times. Russell once again proves why he deserves his “Demented Rooster Strutting in the Barnyard Crowing About Imagined Victories” suit (and doesn’t it fit him well?)

            PS: As to “what I call specific details within Russell’s GelbspanFiles blog or within his articles”, I have indeed described them on many occasions here on Crock—-to summarize, it’s simply lying and distorted horseshit from a whore for fossil fuels. I WOULD address them ON HIS BLOG if Russell allowed outside comments, but he is too much of a coward and too aware of his ignorance of climate science to allow that.

      • Do you actually expect people to take you seriously?

        • dumboldguy Says:

          The only people that Russell wants to “take him seriously” are his Uncle Fred Singer and the other Koch-funded liars and Merchants of Doubt at The Heartland Institute. They are the ones who pay Russell to go onto legitimate climate blogs and be a denier troll, and if he doesn’t please them the $$$$ stops.

          I’m not sure if Russell even takes himself seriously. He was a failed and starving graphic artist and business major when he hit upon climate change denial trolling as a way to make it in the world. Just as a woman with no other options may sell her body to survive, Russell has sold his soul and his integrity to the deniers. If he wasn’t such a self-satisfied, lying, and generally skeezy SOB, I might even feel sorry for him for having sunk so low.

          PS An old USMC drill instructor standby from 50 years ago just popped into my head. The DI’s used to accuse us recruits of being “lower than whale shit” (and they explained that’s because WS sinks to the bottom of the ocean and you can’t get any lower than that—-duh!). Russell would have to dig up and out from under many feet of petrified WS before he even got wet.

          • Out of curiosity, I Googled up Cook’s CV, and it’s pretty much what I expected:


            Associate’s Degree in Graphic Arts, Al Collins School of Graphic Design
            Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration, University of New Mexico

            Business Administration is a common fallback major for students who flunk freshman physics/chemistry/calculus.

   has some more entertaining info about Cook:

            “By January 2013, my savings were drawn down to a critical level. The Heartland Institute, a prominent supporter of skeptical climate scientists (and consequently a major target of global warming advocates as well) generously offered me a $12,000 strings-free grant to enable me to continue devoting time to this subject. I have carte blanche to write whatever I wish to write, whenever I wish to write it, without any direction from Heartland, its donors, or anyone else.

            My plea to anyone with extra money and a soft heart is for more donations so that I might rise further out of my poverty situation, but on one unbreakable condition: No strings of any kind.”

            I’ll have to confess — that really warmed the cockles of my heart!

          • skeptictmac57 Says:

            caerbannog666 – I guess Cook’s plea can literally be described as a ‘poor’ excuse for being an AGW denier/apologist.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            I fall off the chair laughing every time I read this from Russell:

            “I have carte blanche to write whatever I wish to write, whenever I wish to write it, without any direction from Heartland, its donors, or anyone else”.

            He wants us to believe that someone would simply GIVE him $12,000 (with subsequent raises) WITHOUT any expectation of a quid pro quo? What planet does Russell reside on?

            I know, Russell. You want us to PROVE it (repeat 27 times). LMAO again!

          • @caerbannog666: Thanks for falling into the same ol’ trap of citing my Desmog profile – do indulge the entire audience here: where is the evidence within it or in any other Demsog material proving I’m orchestrated and paid to do what I do? And do tell everyone here where it is found within that profile that what I write about Desmog’s co-founders is disputed in any way. Or did you not think those twin wipeouts all the way through? Since neither commenters “d.o.g.” or “otter17” can bring themselves to share with Crocks folks what exactly my “lies” are, why don’t you give it a go?

          • dumboldguy Says:

            When we finally stand Russell up against the wall, and while the firing squad is taking aim, Russell will still be heard saying “prove it” (27 times) and begging people to go on his bullshit site and risk brain damage. His delusional state is now so extreme that he is unable to recognize that his ENTIRE existence is the real “wipeout” here.

            @caerbannog666: It is time to use The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch on Russell. May he RIP.

  4. metzomagic Says:

    At first glance this appears to be a real popcorn/shine a bright light under a dark rock moment brewing, that the AGW deniers are finally going to get their comeuppance.

    But unlike climate scientists at publicly funded institutions, exactly what data retention and/or FOIA laws are non-profits beholden to? I’m guessing none. So can’t they just delete all their embarrassing e-mails?

    • addledlady Says:

      Their first obligation is to maintain records that justify them retaining their tax-free, non-profit status with the IRS.

      Deleting all their records about their activities, including the activity of soliciting donations, might cause a few IRS brows to furrow.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        To say nothing of the fact that much of their past activity and history is a matter of public knowledge and can’t be “deleted”, and the appearance of huge “holes” in their records might lead the FBI to conclude that they were obstructing an investigation or concealing evidence.

        Don’t count on the IRS to get much done or very rapidly—-since the Repugnants have been cutting the IRS budget over the past few years (it’s down to about 80% of what it was), enforcement has tanked. And don’t forget that President Crudz will abolish the IRS the day after his inauguration.

    • False premise question. Who says they have any embarrassing emails to delete? If you want to witness folks attempting to delete embarrassing emails while not having the first clue about the permanence of them, try looking at the ClimateGate Email scandal.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Better yet, go look at Fred Singer’s Merchants of Doubt emails—-the ones where Fred was whining and asking advice on how he might sue those who besmirched his (nonexistent) reputatIon and that of Heartland. RUSSELL COOK is on the addressee list along with a whole rogue’s gallery of other denier whores and morons.

  5. The CEI talks about “affordable energy”. But of course, wind is now the cheapest electricity source (40% of coal costs), industrial scale solar next (50% of coal), and even CSP (concentrated solar power, which delivers dispatchable electricity 24/7) is now just 110% of coal’s costs. So a grid powered by equal proportions of wind, solar and CSP would produce electricity at 2/3rds to cost of coal.

    Plus the explosion of orders for the new Tesla 3 shows just how keen ordinary ppl are on doing something about global warming. The electrification of transport is just starting, with the S-curve of EV demand beginning its exponential phase (sales are doubling every 18 months) Big oil is already mobilising to counter EVs. These court cases will help blunt their efforts. Go for it, I say. Nail the bastards.

    • j4zonian Says:

      It doesn’t make much sense to mix equal parts of the 3, since wind and PV are so much cheaper and the amount of CSP required is only enough to even out gaps (if there are any) in the complementary wind and solar (with others–geothermal, hydro, etc.) So the real mix would actually cost even less in relation to fossil and fissile fuels.

    • Lionel Smith Says:

      Here is an interesting application of electric vehicles the e-volo Volocopter VC200.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Interesting? Only if you want to study our insane obsession with technology and unnecessary “toys”. I myself am saving my pennies to buy a self-driving car, and won’t buy one of these contraptions until it’s self-flying.

        What is really going to happen when the SHTF is that the largest portion of the meager remnant of mankind that survives is going to be be reduced to “self walking” as they gather the roots, grubs, and berries they will be eating once fossil-fueled factory agriculture fails.

  6. redskylite Says:

    Exxon really suck, I talk from experience having worked in an international company where various oil companies have combined to manage oil exploitation in the middle-east. Total of France embrace climate science and listen, while Exxon stubbornly remain arrogant and aloof. I truly hope they are punished for selling the world for a bucket full of bucks.

    2mins 47 secs into this great video clip of an interview with RealNews,
    Alan Robock of Rutgers, an IPPC contributor and very senior climate scientist explains. . .

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: