Hansen wrote: “I did not receive one thin dime from George Soros. Perhaps GAP [Government Accountability Project] did, but I would be surprised if they got $720,000 (that’s a lot of Mercedes). Whatever amount they got, I do not see anything wrong with it. They are a non-profit organization. Seems like a great idea to have some good lawyers trying to protect free speech.
By the way, in case anybody finds out that George Soros INTENDED to send me $720,000 but could not find my address, please let me know! We are pretty hard pressed here.”
To buttress his position, Hansen copied a letter sent by GAP and his counsel to NASA chief Michael Griffin asking for assurances he would “not be punished for exercising his rights under the First Amendment, Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA), and the Anti-Gag Statute to share his internationally-renowned expertise on climate change.”
Direct link to Hansen’s response here.
Noel Sheppard of Newsbusters.org:
NASA’s James Hansen Claims He’s Being ‘Swift-boated’ by Critics
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
I’m not going back to check, but I believe that the annual report for Soros’s foundation specifically mentioned Hansen by name. Hansen clearly has a political agenda and has been caught not being honest before. At this stage, he has no credibility as a scientist.
I should have read the link to NewsBusters first. A commenter provided a link to this current paper by Dr Vincent Gray, who Hansen and his cronies have tried to “swiftboat” themselves.
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/gray%20ipcc%20spin.pdf
The commenter added this obvious information:
“There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition.”
– Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Jen is right to want to address global warming issues strictly on the science, but to do so requires that people who want to address global warming based upon politics need to be dismissed from the debate.
Hansen’s name is on page 123 of the Soros report:
http://www.soros.org/resources/articles_publications/publications/annual_20070731/a_complete.pdf
Scientist Protests NASA’s
Censorship Attempts
James E. Hansen, the director of
the Goddard Institute for Space
Studies at NASA, protested
attempts to silence him after
officials at NASA ordered him
to refer press inquiries to the
public affairs office and required
the presence of a public affairs
representative at any interview.
The Government Accountability
Project, a whistleblower protection
organization and OSI grantee,
came to Hansen’s defense by
providing legal and media advice.
The campaign on Hansen’s behalf
resulted in a decision by NASA to
revisit its media policy.
It is not terribly unusual for greenie personages like Hansen to “get” this sort of money.
I say “get” in quotes, because, in greenie “non-profit” parlance, that’s also called “payment-in-kind.”
In the US, and not too long ago, there was a scandal involving Richard Nixon and the “Campaign to Re-Elect the President (CREEP).” Campaign-finance restrictions were dodged because people donated to a “non-profit” activist group (CREEP) instead of to the President’s actual campaign fund.
From what I can tell from the documents involved, some of which have been linked here by our kind and generous hostess, this is a re-play of the CREEP scandal.
In other words, Hansen doesn’t get the money to buy houses, hot cars and hot mistresses. Instead, the money goes to his supporters who supply him with publicity that buys houses, hot cars and hot mistresses for people who sell windmills, nuclear, geothermal, you name it.
I’m a jaded ‘old hand’ when it comes to greenie finance. I used to be a greenie. Everything green has been bought and paid for. With my new job, I don’t have to lie any more.
You rightist creeps must be getting worried. Ya got nothing except a grubby attempt by the Bush administration to take Hansen out. Thankfully there’s a few true patriots like Soros out there to defend against extremist right wing fascists because it isn’t swiftboaters like yourselves. What an absolutely shoddy case.
Hansen must be a big worry to you all – represents powerful big medicine.
Schiller ” From what I can tell from the documents involved” = FROM WHAT I CAN TELL !!! – meaning you don’t know you goon. Schiller you don’t need to lie anymore as you were born to it.
“hot cars and hot mistresses ” = really you’re just filth Schiller. So I hear Schiller that you don’t beat your wife – is that right?
Anyway we know how your creeps work:
ORGANIZATIONS IN EXXON SECRETS DATABASE
http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/listorganizations.php
My God – Realclimate is in their funding list – did you see that?
Shill be right Luke, Hansen isnt guilty as Soros, who has been convicted in court.
Boy Luke – talk about framing!
Why has this hit such a raw nerve with you?
Is it because the true believers have invested so much in the theory that any financial link with a third party invalidates the science?
Most people don’t accept that – it’s a juvenile attempt to categorise and marginalise.
If Soros or Michaels or Singer or whoever is assisted financially by a person or organisation so what?
It’s the substance that counts.
Soros made money by manipulating markets and is now shorting the $US.
“My God – Realclimate is in their funding list – did you see that?”
I see many organisations on this made up list, made up by who knows and who cares. But as invited by the list makers themselves, I bothered to click and follow, the lead for Realclimate, in the hope it would tell me how much dirt money they got.
But alas, it was nothing.
More cretinous b/shit and unread threads provided by the usual suspect.
Rog
what does that have to do with with Hansen not getting anything from Soros?
Luke,
It’s not precisely true that “You rightist creeps must be getting worried.” Fascism, such as eco-fascism (see, Third Reich, Nazism) emerges as a political force when the Left becomes Rightist, but can’t acknowledge that–even to itself.
I assume you number me among the “rightist creeps.” Well, I’m in favor of human rights–which, historically, used to be the province of the Left. Interesting how things change. And get perverted.
As for being a “creep,” well, apparently, you are the judge.
Even so, payments-in-kind are common in green money-laundering. It accounts for about eighty percent of their expenditures.
Your vociferous denial of my remarks suggests that you are not entirely innocent of this form of financial elision.
If Soros or Michaels or Singer or whoever is assisted financially by a person or organisation so what?
Should read of course;
If HANSEN or Michaels or Singer or whoever is assisted financially by a person or organisation so what?
Schiller is in favour of human rights “darkies in Africa who die quietly” – please oh please don’t try to pretend mate. Not convincing when you turn on the “concern” and “compassion”.
As for “you are not entirely innocent of this form of financial elision.” comment – well up yours you libellous creep.
Jim – the issue is whether the opinion is “bought” or not. Guns for hire. Objectivity ? (I expect now the usual gravy train drivel). Jim I just thought I’d pen something as extreme as the post and misc comments as this sort of political bilge deserves that sort of putdown. Rog of course gets off on the little left/right political intrigue – but it’s totally tedious compared to the issue of whether his science in on the money or not.
In the end the atmosphere will be oblivious to our subtle political interactions and Hansen’s treatment by the administration. Let’s face it – the whole issue is politicised to buggery now.
Malcolm – the “Realclimate was on the list” was actually a joke.
So we all agree, $720,000 was a lie?
Luke,
So was my response.
All I did was to follow what the list maker asked readers to do, and look up the people on the list to find out how much money they had been given by Exxon. That is the exhortation in the banner
Many of those listed and involved with climate had a nil return ie no money had been given.
Why were they on this list if they had received nothing from Exxon anyway. Whats the point.?
Obviously it is the list itself that mattered, not whether or not in reality they were given money.
So the fact that Realclimate where not on it, was irrelevant, except to highlight the fact that they are obviously seen as “good guys” by the list authors.
Just more shonky marketing by the greenie freaks.
Golly gee Malcolm – it’s pretty basic isn’t it. Money paid for a style of research – not to further knowledge but simply to create uncertainty for political purposes.
You know what most of sites of the list members sound like. Whingey whinge whinge. Sook sook sook. Hansen Hansen Hansen. Gore Gore Gore. And on it goes.
Singer. Tobacco. Yes members of the committee we all believe smoking does not cause cancer. Come on !
Can you prove Realclimate are greenie freaks? At least its an intelligent read compared to Climate Cesspit.
Here we go again. More half read nonsense by the Great Sprayer.
I made no judgement about Realclimate at all.
I had observed that RC were not included in the list prepared by some greenie outfit, that is clearly engaging in shonky marketing, by trying to purport that all those listed, had in fact received money from Exxon.
The fact is, that appearance on the list and the act of receiving money are two different things. Most of the ones I checked had received nothing.
Because Realclimate were not included, I assumed that they are classed by the list maker, as “good guys”.
That is their judgement. Not mine.
Its not that hard when you turn your brain on, and bother to read it all. But still that has always been the problem with you Luke hasnt it.
“..the issue is whether the opinion is “bought” or not. Guns for hire. Objectivity ?”
We have been here before but I sort of thought we’d moved on from the “smear by association” debate.
No-one can speak with any authority on an author’s motivation except the author him/herself.
But if we are still taking that line then Hansen receiving pro bono services from Soros means he’s a mouthpiece for Soros’ political/economic views.
What simplistic nonsense.
Jim – by-line slur is simply that Soros gave Hansen a wad of cash.
As I said Luke. Despite all the waffle about payment in kind, the consensus seems to be the accusation of $720,000 was a lie.
Hansen must have the same handlers as Hillary Clinton to deny money trails.
Woody
are you saying the $720,000 is true?
Actually, the $720,000 was something of a lie.
Payments in kind don’t go straight into a pocket. Lots of it goes to “administration expense,” and a lot to “fundraising expense.”
So, a lot of that money went to staff, photocopying, website development, and of course some to the six-figure salaries of the overseers.
In a way, all of it went to Hansen, but merely to tout his story, with the rest to residual scare profiteers.
Hansen is grinding his teeth over this, as we can see. He protests he hasn’t seen “one thin dime” and why not? He saw three-quarters of a million blown to dust, using the results of his work, and he’s not getting a cut.
Hansen’s cut is not having to pay a secretary, buy office space, print and circulate flyers, and do web development.
Hansen’s cut doesn’t buy groceries, though. (Unless there’s another deal on that side of the street.)