A Most Unfair Game

The message is more meaningful than any amount of money. I have been writing about the political deception of climate change, on different platforms, for the past two decades, still awaiting my very first check or ‘cheque’ if you’re reading this north of the American border

In 2019 Mark Maslin a professor in the Department of Geography, University College London, in London, England, without evidence or providence, wrote that gas and oil companies were funding climate opposition to the tune of $200 million annually. Despite any substantiation to this value, like the indictment of the 1.5 degree Celsius of warming mark as the grave and critical moment in initiating the complete devastation of the earth, it is merely plucked from an activist’s fanciful, CO2-inundated, methane-deranged atmosphere. The $200 million value has been endeavored to be tallied, accounted and proven, without success.

While the linked story has some monetary value discrepancies, I remember several years ago when Greenpeace uncovered Koch Industries, and specifically the Koch brothers, Charles and David, funding opponent climate change research to the tune of $25 million - this unremarkable discovery by Greenpeace an organization, who in 2022 had revenues of $368 million. Of this massive income, Forbes Magazine wrote Greenpeace is, “a skillfully managed business” with full command of “the tools of direct mail and image manipulation – and tactics that would bring instant condemnation if practiced by a for-profit corporation.”

Patrick Moore, a Canadian industry consultant with Greenspirit Enterprises and a co-founder of Greenpeace departed that organization in 1986 citing, “Beginning in the mid-1980s, Greenpeace, and much of the environmental movement, made a sharp turn to the political left and began adopting extreme agendas that abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism”, and further stated, “The environmental movement has lost its way, favoring political correctness over factual accuracy, stooping to scare tactics to garner support. Many campaigns now waged in the name of the environment would result in increased harm to both the environment and human welfare if they were to succeed.”

Several years ago, Kenneth Haapala, president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), wrote, ”When the budgets for FY 2015 & FY 2016 of the U.S. Global Change Research Program are included, the total expenditures for “climate science” from FY 1993 to FY 2016 come to $47.56 billion, with international assistance amounting to $8.24 billion.” He added, “Not all of this government funding goes to advocacy of climate alarmism, of course. But it would be hard for the federal government to spend billions of dollars a year on a controversial topic, with every penny of the spending based on the presumption that global warming is a serious crisis worthy of billions of tax dollars, and not have those billions make a powerful impression on the public.”

These of course are values through 2016. One can just imagine if we could add in the next 7 years as well the significant amounts of private donations. This certainly makes any measure of money contested by climate activists for opposing climate change very petty. As evidenced in the linked story, InfluenceMap, an international think tank gave $1.2175 billion to just 10 climate change marketing foundations as follows:

And as the linked story continues, “And these are only the funds with which InfluenceMap has a direct relationship. There are many others, including the Rockefeller family, Bezos, Bloomberg, Gates along with the Hewletts, Packards, and Gettys.”

Yet, if an oil and gas company devotes a small amount, certainly in comparison to those that wish to annihilate them, it is sheer contempt and the most sinful act ever rendered. Fairness has gone totally amuck and many, even those outside progressivism, and that gladly use gas and oil products every day, approve.