Bush-thinktanks Caught Bribing Scientists to Dispute Climate Report

Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2004397,00.html

Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by

a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil

companies to undermine a major climate change report due to

be published today.

Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI),

an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush

administration, offered the payments for articles that

emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Travel expenses and additional payments were also offered.

The UN report was written by international experts and is

widely regarded as the most comprehensive review yet of

climate change science. It will underpin international

negotiations on new emissions targets to succeed the Kyoto

agreement, the first phase of which expires in 2012. World

governments were given a draft last year and invited to comment.

The AEI has received more than $1.6m from ExxonMobil

and more than 20 of its staff have worked as consultants to

the Bush administration. Lee Raymond, a former head of

ExxonMobil, is the vice-chairman of AEI's board of trustees.

The letters, sent to scientists in Britain, the US and elsewhere,

attack the UN's panel as "resistant to reasonable criticism and

dissent and prone to summary conclusions that are poorly

supported by the analytical work" and ask for essays that

"thoughtfully explore the limitations of climate model outputs".

Climate scientists described the move yesterday as an attempt

to cast doubt over the "overwhelming scientific evidence" on

global warming. "It's a desperate attempt by an organisation

who wants to distort science for their own political aims," said

David Viner of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of

East Anglia.

"The IPCC process is probably the most thorough and open

review undertaken in any discipline. This undermines the

confidence of the public in the scientific community and the

ability of governments to take on sound scientific advice," he said.

The letters were sent by Kenneth Green, a visiting scholar at

AEI, who confirmed that the organisation had approached

scientists, economists and policy analysts to write articles for

an independent review that would highlight the strengths and

weaknesses of the IPCC report.

"Right now, the whole debate is polarised," he said. "One

group says that anyone with any doubts whatsoever are

deniers and the other group is saying that anyone who wants

to take action is alarmist. We don't think that approach has a

lot of utility for intelligent policy."

One American scientist turned down the offer, citing fears that

the report could easily be misused for political gain.

"You wouldn't know if some of the other authors might say

nothing's going to happen, that we should ignore it, or that it's

not our fault," said Steve Schroeder, a professor at Texas

A&M university.

The contents of the IPCC report have been an open secret

since the Bush administration posted its draft copy on the

internet in April. It says there is a 90% chance that human

activity is warming the planet, and that global average

temperatures will rise by another 1.5 to 5.8C this century,

depending on emissions.

Lord Rees of Ludlow, the president of the Royal Society,

Britain's most prestigious scientific institute, said: "The IPCC

is the world's leading authority on climate change and its latest

report will provide a comprehensive picture of the latest

scientific understanding on the issue. It is expected to stress,

more convincingly than ever before, that our planet is already

warming due to human actions, and that 'business as usual'

would lead to unacceptable risks, underscoring the urgent

need for concerted international action to reduce the worst

impacts of climate change. However, yet again, there will be a

vocal minority with their own agendas who will try to suggest

otherwise."

Ben Stewart of Greenpeace said: "The AEI is more than just

a thinktank, it functions as the Bush administration's

intellectual Cosa Nostra. They are White House surrogates in

the last throes of their campaign of climate change denial.

They lost on the science; they lost on the moral case for

action. All they've got left is a suitcase full of cash."

On Monday, another Exxon-funded organisation based in

Canada will launch a review in London which casts doubt on

the IPCC report. Among its authors are Tad Murty, a former

scientist who believes human activity makes no contribution to

global warming. Confirmed VIPs attending include Nigel

Lawson and David Bellamy, who believes there is no link

between burning fossil fuels and global warming.