NGO Funding Promotes Climate Change and Corrupts Science
A stunning new analysis reveals unbridled academic fraud
Dear Readers, I am always looking for new and obscure subjects about “human-made global warming” that hopefully will elicit some interest, chuckles, and educate as well.
In this case, there are no chuckles but rather a new level of surprise about how insidious the corruption has become in the scientific field, all funded by your tax dollars.
The following article was first published in a favorite Substack publication entitled Coffee and Covid, authored by the erudite Jeff Childers. It describes a study that unveiled a positive correlation between “Non-governmental organization” (NGO) funding of academics and the promotion of the “human-made climate change” agenda.
The study also revealed that all of the 331 authors surveyed did not admit to any conflict of interest with regards to their funding source.
Question(s): where did the NGO funding come from? Your tax dollars, funneled to NGOs via USAID, NIH, and others?
A new preprint study published last week on OSF titled, “Conflicts of Interest, Funding Support, and Author Affiliation in Peer-Reviewed Research on the Relationship between Climate Change and Geophysical Characteristics of Hurricanes.” You’ll never believe this one. Well, you probably will believe it, but still.
The researchers “analyzed 82 peer-reviewed articles on the relationship between climate change and the geophysical properties of hurricanes published between 1994 and 2023.” They were looking to see whether there was any statistical correlation between the climate studies’ conclusions and the authors’ disclosed conflicts of interest and affiliations or the studies’ funding sources.
They were partly stymied right out of the gate. They found “no associations between Conflict-of-Interest disclosures and study outcomes”— because “none (0) of the 331 authors disclosed COIs.” The researchers dryly noted that, “we suspect that some authors had COIs that they did not disclose.”
One wonders how these studies could have survived peer review lacking disclosures of conflicts of interests, but whatever.
What they did find was, and maybe you should sit down for this: “Non-governmental organization (NGO) funding was a significant predictor for an article to find a positive association between climate change and geophysical characteristics of hurricanes as a research outcome.”
USAID? The NIH? In other words, were the NGOs that funded the climate studies reaching the approved conclusions themselves funded by the United States taxpayer? I’d bet a lot. I’d even bet your money (after all, that’s what they’re using).
This study was just the latest icicle hanging from the expanding snowball of the great scientific deep freeze—where progress hibernates, and inconvenient truths are buried in snowdrifts of pre-approved conclusions. It is devilishly hard to have progress when the outcomes are predetermined and frozen in place, and where pseudoscience gets paid— leaving real scientists freezing in a ditch.
Remember— it’s much more damaging than just fake climate studies. It is an avalanche of pseudoscientific misinformation covering the entire landscape of academia. The NGO-purchased studies support claims of consensus, leading to ever more funding for more scripted studies, which in turn justify ever more laws eroding freedom.
This isn’t just academic fraud—it’s a feedback loop of manufactured consensus, feeding government control disguised as science. It is long past time to cut off the taxpayer tap—no more government-funded NGOs, no more pre-approved ‘truths.’ Stop following the science.
Non-corrupt Section: NOAA Data Shows a Decrease in Hurricane Intensity, Frequency, Starting from the 1800s and 1900
In contrast and opposition to NGO fueled academia, scientists at the CO2 Coalition and others have shown a slight decline in landfalling hurricanes, no increase in hurricane intensity and a significant decline in severe tornadoes - all adapted from NOAA data.
Some links below:
The likely largest driver of Earth's surface temperature is the amount of energy delivered from the Sun. During the "Maunder Minimum" from 1645 to 1715 when there were no sunspots for about five decades, there was a "little ice age" in Europe. The Sun has a variety of cycles longer than the 11-year long cycle. Some cycles are more than 1,000 years long. Here's an introduction from January, 2017 : https://www.swsc-journal.org/articles/swsc/pdf/2017/01/swsc170014.pdf
TC can you define "settled science" for me? Because I thought science continues to evolve as we learn. 🤔😁