[Osx-nutters] Denial

[Stefano Mori]

On 2007-Aug-14, at 01:08, Chris Gehlker wrote:

> On Aug 13, 2007, at 4:12 PM, Stefano Mori wrote:
>
>> I don't separate the two, as that money to test theory is directly
>> funding careers, research departments, and reputations. There is
>> momentum for entrenched opinions and politics to last a whole
>> generation.
>
> There is much that I disagree with here but what stands out is your
> notion that there are "billions poured into the AGW worldview/
> science".


"Although the United States spends $1.8 billion a year on climate  
research, only 6 percent goes to modeling that can provide a much  
clearer picture of long-term changes, Sarachik said. England, on the  
other hand, has focused its spending, with $50 million for the  
European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting and another $25  
million for Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. The  
centers use data and small-scale research generated in the United  
States to synthesize large-scale climate information."

<http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/2001archive/04-01archive/ 
k041901.html>

And Bush claims he was spending 3 billion a year, but much of that  
will be creatively counted, although it's up to you whether you want  
to include things like £100 million to DuPont to develop solar cells?  
Do you count HSBC bank in China donating 100 million to WWF and co.  
for climate change related conservation?

Nevertheless, the 6% quoted above is over 100 million, just for  
modeling in the US.

Japan's NEC Earth Simulator cost 350 million just for the hardware.

Even if this isn't money for salaries, you get a lot of professional  
kudos and respect for bringing in large amounts of research money.  
It's still money and prestige one way or another.

Stefano

> Where does that come from? Certainly if we  add up the
> annual budgets of the national weather services of every country in
> the world and the budgets of all the meteorology/climate science
> departments of every university  in the world it amounts to a few
> million dollars.  It's probably very comparable to what the deniers
> have been spending on PR and I would  guess slightly less. Climate
> science is  not 'Big Science' by any means.