The California Institute of Technology (CalTech) and NASA showed they are bought and sold by alarmist Daddy Warbucks money, as CalTech announced it is accepting a monstrous $750 million donation that will fund alarmist programs.
CalTech announced it will use the money to establish a sustainability center, fund alarmist climate change programs, and funnel money to NASA for similar programs.
Multi-billionaire Beverly Hills tycoons Stewart and Lynda Resnick made the huge donation to CalTech.
Stewart Resnick referred to a “climate crisis” and said, “It’s all about the weather. If we can’t solve that problem, everything else we’ve done is not going to have any meaning.”
According to the Los Angeles Times, much of the money will be funneled to the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which actively promotes climate alarmism.
With a $750 million donation from climate alarmists at stake, CalTech researchers certainly realize that any climate research and programs they undertake better reach alarmist conclusions.
NASA administrators and researchers certainly understand the same.
When activists give massive amounts of money to public universities and government agencies for the primary purpose of advancing global warming alarmism, those universities and government agencies lose any hint of objectivity and credibility.
This one donation to support climate alarmism exceeds all cumulative donations ever given to fund climate research and programs by skeptical organizations. And it is just one small component of money funneled to support alarmist research and organizations.
Ironically, the Resnicks produce Fiji Water, which is the subject of a host of complaints from environmentalists and fair labor advocates. Fiji Water has also reneged on climate pledges, according to the liberal website Vox.
Read more at CFACT
$750M wouldn’t build a nuclear generating station, but it will buy millions of minds.
Damn, to have such monies to piss away…
As soon as real scientists step up the wallets open to shut them down .
Science fiction is what they are hoping to buy .
$750 million… but I thought the science was settled ?
What they really meant was the science is silenced . Or at least that’s the hope .
What a waste of $750 million . How do you top the earth has a fever ?
20 years of fake science peddled for a scam .
Warming is good cooling isn’t unless you are trilled with mass extinction .
Gee I wonder why the donors chose a warm place to reside ?
How about $750 million for truth in science / Or should we have to pay for it ?
Other than simply saying that the science is settled, when liberals do try to justify climate alarmism, they point to the overwhelming number of published articles supporting it. We have known for a long time that the reason for these articles is that the alarmists are getting what they paid for. The $750 million donation is one huge payment. Considering this payment with what else is going on there seems to be a big push. The environmental alarmist have been trying to get the agenda passed for 30 years. Their actions seem to indicate they believe this is the time for it to happen.
Reminds me of Bloomberg – he ‘bought’ the Harvard School of Medicine. Every “study” they have done since then is ‘anti-gun’.
Let the Democrats campaign on ‘gun control’ (confiscate), Medicare for all (the Unions aren’t too happy), Green New Deal (regular folk are learning just what it’s going to cost them personally), do away with the Electoral Collage (let NY and CA select the President) — and all the rest of their hogwash.
Provided Republican supporters don’t become complacent, “I don’t need to vote, he’s certain to win anyway”, the democrats will suffer the most humiliating political defeat ever in the history of the USA.
It must have been from another part of Harvard or before Bloomberg bought the School of Medicine, but I did see a pro-gun article published by Harvard. The researchers started with the assumption that gun control was beneficial, but they used good scientific techniques and kept open minds. They concluded that if anything gun control is against our best interests. At the time the low crime rate in Europe was always thrown up as an indication that gun control was beneficial. What Harvard team discovered that even though Europe had a lower crime rate, that crime rate was even lower before they implement their gun control. The crime rate went up right after gun control. A very good high school friend of mine was involved in a similar study done by the University of California. They also started out with the assumption that gun control was beneficial, but concluded that if anything it was harmful.
You cannot compare USA with Europe, guns were part of USA early founding, in a dangerous new land. UK has a tiny fraction of gun crime in a year compared to USA in one day. Nobody in UK would dream of having a gun, and anyway cannot get one without a proper supervised license, as with some farmers and sportsmen. No gun stores. US crime rate is huge. Current knife crime in London is related to tribalism, clashes of different people.
The FBI report on crime was just released. The 30 year trend of decreasing violent crime continued – the figures for 2018 were down compared to 2017.
The downturn started two years before Clinton took office – and just two years after Florida relaxed their rules on concealed carry. Now most States have some form of legal concealed carry for their residents.
Ref the UK – I read that their Olympic shooting team has to travel to the continent to practice. Speaking of the UK. The English Bill of Rights (1689) says: “That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;” (From: yale.edu – Avalon Project) In the US – no State religion, no class distinction, and “shall not be infringed”. (They didn’t include “The President shall make no laws without the consent of Congress” [In the UK : King – Parliament])
Dave L – yes, that was earlier. At one point, the CDC did a study on how often firearms were used in self-defense. It was never released. A researcher looking through their web site stumbled on it while looking for something else. Over two million times a year – well over three times the figure the pollies were talking about at that time.
Pouring money down the drain for a fake crisis always leave it to liberals to find the ways to waste money on such idiotic things