Notice! Care2 will go offline for site maintenance July 28 at 9pm PST. Thanks
START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Success! GM Stops Funding Climate Change Deniers

Success! GM Stops Funding Climate Change Deniers

In February, Care2 reported on the discovery of leaked documents that exposed General Motors as a major donor to the Heartland Climate Institute, a notorious think-tank of climate deniers.

“Heartland’s expenditures include paying several people they consider “high profile” to keep spouting off about climate change being a hoax. Craig Idso is receiving some $135, 000 a year for this crap,” wrote Care2′s Joel Boyce. “Fred Singer receives not quite half as much, but $60, 000 simply for making stuff up? In this economy? Not too shabby.

“By the way, the Heartland Institute doesn’t just lie about climate change, they get paid by Reynolds American, a tobacco company, for saying that cigarettes are good for you, so now you know you can trust them.”

The leaked documents also revealed the Heartland Institute’s plan to insert climate change denial into public education materials.

In response to this discovery, over 5,500 Care2 members took action by signing a petition to GM. Now, ForecastTheFacts.org reports that General Motors has announced that they will discontinue funding from the climate change-denying Heartland Institute.

“We applaud GM’s decision and the message it sends: that it is no longer acceptable for corporations to promote the denial of climate change, and that support for an organization like Heartland is not in line with GM’s values,” said Forecast the Facts Campaign Director Daniel Souweine. “This victory belongs to the 20,000 Americans, including 10,000 GM owners, who demanded that GM put its money where its mouth is on climate change and sustainability.”

We couldn’t agree more. Congrats on another important victory Care2 community!

Read more: , , , , ,

Image via ForecastTheFacts.org

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

118 comments

+ add your own
7:00AM PDT on May 16, 2012

It is just that when you say cumulative it sounds like they all work in the same direction and as I said for the clouds, ovearall the clouds of the world CUT the warming effect of the incoming sunshine by 8%. Thus by increasign water vapor due to warming the cloud cover increases as well. The clouds are far more effective in cooling or warming the climate than CO2. You could write all the theory in the world and still you couldn't accurately predict present climate based on past measuring station data, unless you took into account the clouds. And that is where the present models fail miserably. If I quote Kevin Trenberth again, a leading modeller at US National Centre of Atmospheric Research: "Climate models do not do clouds well, they are perhaps the biggest problem we have in using climate models to make prediction about global warming". That is why I will keep an eye on CLOUD programme in CERN.

But I will take into account your (LD B.) arguments. Here I would only like to ask you to what extent is the theory you stated confirmed in practice (when using REAL raw data, not only the 1500 of 6000 measuring stations used by NOAA in their studies)?

4:20PM PDT on May 13, 2012

Not true that water and CO2 abosrb at totally different wavelengths, they overlap somewhat. And I quoted what I mean with "potency"! And you can't say that all effects are cumulative, clouds generally cool Earth more than they warm it. I always find claims of importance of water vapour and clouds funny because they always come into play when CO2 theory "fails", when it is not enough. I doubt many people know that water vapor accounts for about 95% of GHG, and remains at steady 1% unpruturbed by anthropogenic effects. If I quote Kevin Trenberth, a leading modeller at US National Centre of Atmospheric Research: "Climate models do not do clouds well, they are perhaps the biggest problem we have in using climate models to make prediction about global warming" And if you are talking about long cycles with little effect, have you ever observed how quickly the temperature changes with cloud cover, far more effective than the worst GW predictions. Henrik Svensmark: "Overall, the clouds of the world cut the warming effect of the incoming sunshine by 8%. If nothing else changed, removing this huge parasol would raise the planet's tamperature by about 10°C! Conversely an increase in the low clouds by only a few % would chill the world noticeably."

1:11PM PDT on May 13, 2012

As I said, yes I have studied the physichs and chemistry involved with radiative forcing and how CO2 loses its "potency" as the concentration of CO2 gets higher also ;). If I quote from Environmental chemistry: "If a particular species absorbs only in region of the IR spectrum where absorption is nearly complete due to other species, then an increase in its concentration can add only minimally to warming". To ask you something: Have you studied anything else besides what you are asking/claiming? For example: how clouds effect global temperatures (negative feedback), Milankovitsch theory, Chilling stars from Henrik Svensmark, CLOUD experiment in CERN...

11:55AM PDT on May 13, 2012

I've been studying this topic for more than two months now, because I am writing my bachelors degree on this ;). I have already read the Environmental chemistry: a global perspective (http://www.worldcat.org/title/environmental-chemistry-a-global-perspective/oclc/670190028?referer=di&ht=edition) where radiative forcing is well explained; among other literature. I found quite a lot of contradictory "facts" in different literature though, so yes I had to go down to basics.

11:35AM PDT on May 13, 2012

Sure, cut out what can't be explained, that is all that IPCC does. So if it is so straightforward why doesn't NOAA want to give tha raw data to other scientists so they can check their conclusions. Oh yeah, they might "interpret" it othwerwise. Remember Climategate? http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/climategate-hide-the-decline-codified/

10:50AM PDT on May 13, 2012

Please convince me then LD B. that AGW is real with some raw! data, not some computer predictions. Look, simply the fact that FIRST the global temperature increases and THEN after apx. 800 years CO2 increases (follows) is FACT enough that AGW is a hoax! http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen/correlaEng.html

2:46PM PDT on Apr 24, 2012

Hope we can trust them...

11:50AM PDT on Apr 3, 2012

For those accusing the "opposing" opinions on this topic by claming they are paid by some pro-oil company and claiming they get their propaganda from unreliable resources. I ask you this: Where do you get your information / "facts". How much influence does the media have on this topic? The media boom on GW was so violent that almost everyone believes it without doubt. Do you see where I am going with this... Do you just read the posts posted by organisations such as IPCC, NOAA and such, or do you also read on the debate regarding the posts?! For example I suggest you do this here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm

5:01AM PDT on Apr 3, 2012

It will cost between $1 and $2 billion between R&D for MIT School of Engineering to get Enhanced Geothermal Systems really going and "artificial trees" to pull CO2 from air, but CO2 works better than H20 as hydraulic/heat-transfer fluid in Enhanced Geothermal Systems and they can sequester as much CO2 as needs to be sequestered even before we drill and frack as much Enhanced Geothermal System as it would take to replace our present coal-burning electric plants. We can have our cake and eat it too.

4:23AM PDT on Apr 3, 2012

Lonely and bored right? Wanna meet sexy & rich cougars or handsome younger guys, like minded partner online? Want to meet serious and quality singles near you? I have been using cougar dating site ----Mixеd MαtCh i n g .c(0)m -------. it concentrates on 30plus cougars and younger men who are looking for friendship, companion, and have sexy mature fun, romance, relax... members on this website are real with photos and details..Well, you do not have to be lonely and I have been using it and it has worked for me. It is free to sign up. Just a suggestio

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

ads keep care2 free

meet our writers

Beth Buczynski Beth is a freelance writer and editor living in the Rocky Mountain West. So far, Beth has lived in... more
Story idea? Want to blog? Contact the editors!
ads keep care2 free

more from causes

Animal Welfare

Causes Canada

Causes UK

Children

Civil Rights

Education

Endangered Wildlife

Environment & Wildlife

Global Development

Global Warming

Health Policy

Human Rights

LGBT rights

Politics

Real Food

Trailblazers For Good

Women's Rights




Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.