Debunking the Climate Scam
Billions of Dollars -
Greedy Green Corporations -
No Warming For Two decades -
Bought and Paid For Organizations
How the WWF Infiltrated the IPCC – Part 1
What is the WWF?
In the United States and Canada the initials WWF stand for the World Wildlife Fund. Elsewhere, this organization calls itself the World Wide Fund for Nature.
The WWF is an activist lobby group. On its website one finds declarations such as:
It is nearly impossible to overstate the threat of climate change. [see here, backup link here]
WWF’s vision of an eco-
a global legal framework…to ensure that governments can verify each other’s actions. [see here, backup link here]
Members of the voting public have never been asked if they want to pay for this new layer of bureaucracy, if they want to live under its restrictions, or if they think it’s even a good idea. The WWF you see, knows what’s best for all of us.
It is important to understand that while the WWF might once have been a humble, shoestring operation this is no longer the case. It has grown into a business entity with offices in 30 countries that employs a staff of 5,000 (see the last page of this PDF). The US branch of the WWF alone employs:
a Managing Director of International Finance
a Vice President of Business and Industry
a Senior Vice President of Market Transformation and
a Government Relations Program manager
That same branch also includes a:
a Director of International Climate Policy
a Managing Director of Climate Change
a Managing Director of Climate Adaptation
a Director of Climate Change Communications
a Senior Scientist, Climate Adaptation and
a lead specialist on Climate Change
In 2010, the WWF’s US arm had operating revenues of $224 million – just under a quarter of a billion dollars. Yes, that’s a B.
By way of comparison, operating revenues for Amnesty International’s US affiliate
amounted to $36 million – one-
According to its 2010 annual report, the WWF’s international network had operating
revenues of €524,963,000. Converted to US dollars that’s just shy of three-
When hiring someone new to lead its global climate initiative recently the WWF did
what hedge funds and the International Monetary Fund do when seeking high-
In other words, the WWF is an obscenely wealthy organization. And money, as they say, talks. When one is in the lobbying business and cash is abundant, one treats one’s friends very well, indeed. Nice meals, nice hotel rooms, trips to exotic locales – and heaven only knows what else.
Which brings me to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The Recruitment Drive
In late 2004, around the time that work was beginning on what would become the IPCC’s
landmark 2007 report, the WWF launched a recruitment drive. It established a parallel
body – the Climate Witness Scientific Advisory Panel – and then systematically targeted
It’s not clear what the courtship process involved, precisely – or who joined in what year or in what order – but by late 2008 the WWF says it had recruited 130
leading climate scientists mostly, but not exclusively, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change… [see p. 2 of this PDF]
It is difficult to believe that any self-
In remarkably candid fashion the WWF says it wants to
inspire stronger action on climate change in the community. We aim to build a movement of individuals…who want to be active in addressing this threat.
No one, therefore, lied to these “leading climate scientists.” No one soft-
Scientists who join the WWF’s panel are required to complete a form that indicates
their willingness to evaluate testimonials the WWF collects from ordinary people
who believe that they themselves have detected human-
The glorified public-
People are asked if they have personally observed changes in rainfall, snowfall, sea water temperature, and ocean currents. But sensible inquiries – such as Have you kept a lengthy, careful, written record? – are nowhere to be found.
The WWF invites these people to assign “consequences” to the changes they believe
they’ve personally witnessed. It poses all sorts of questions the average woman-
Next the WWF invites its respondents to tick off which human health consequences
they think are directly linked to the climate changes they believe they have witnessed.
Has malaria increased? How about water-
The WWF explains to the scientists it’s trying to recruit that the only thing they
need do is “peer-
for levels of consistency with current scientific knowledge of climate change
impacts…The primary function of a [Scientific Advisory Panel] member is to verify
the scientific basis of the Climate Witness stories WWF collects from around the
world to ensure they are consistent with peer-
The public fills out five pages of questions, but the scientists are informed they’ll be asked to evaluate
In other words, the data the scientists receive will first have been packaged by activists. This fact, on its own, invalidates the entire exercise.
The WWF advises these scientists that, for their trouble, they’ll receive a handsome reward:
Participation in the Climate Witness Programme is voluntary and in return we acknowledge your contribution on our global website as well as featuring your name below every Climate Witness stories [sic] you review.
So why can’t people who are smart enough to earn a PhD figure out that this is a spectacularly bad deal? Work for us for free and, in exchange we’ll take your pristine scientific reputation and link it to our scientifically bankrupt campaign to frighten and manipulate the public.
We’ll do you the great service of advertising, on our global website, that no one
should ever again mistake you for someone with sound judgment. We’ll use our multi-
Ah, but perhaps I’m not being entirely fair. There’s one more line to that paragraph. It reads:
WWF is also seeking opportunities to promote new climate change research so please feel free to contact the Climate Witness Manager for more information.
to be continued… read Part 2 here
While the WWF is shockingly cavalier about tarnishing the reputation of the scientists it recruits it is nevertheless keenly aware of the need to carefully manage its own image.
We ask that you seek prior consent from your…Liaison person if you wish to use the WWF or Climate Witness Programme logo or names, or make a reference to your participation in the Climate Witness Programme. [see p. 6]
How’s that for chutzpah?
On page one, the Climate Witness Interview Form asks members of the public two questions that give them enormous incentive to exaggerate their observations. First they are asked:
Are you prepared to travel to your capital for Climate Witness event if the costs were reimbursed? [sic]
Translation: How would you like a free trip to somewhere you might never get to visit otherwise?
Shamelessly, the WWF then ups the ante:
Are you prepared to travel internationally for a Climate Witness event if the costs were reimbursed?
read Part 2 here
How the WWF Infiltrated the IPCC – Part 2
Between 2004 and 2008 the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) persuaded 130 scientists to join its Climate Witness Scientific Advisory Panel. As I explained in Part 1, the Climate Witness campaign has an overtly political purpose. The WWF openly admits it’s trying to increase the public’s sense of urgency about climate change. Fear, alarm, anxiety – that’s what they’re pushing.
The campaign involves collecting testimonials from ordinary people who believe they
are witnessing the dire effects of climate change in their own backyards. In an attempt
to imbue these beliefs with an aura of scientific respectability, scientists on the
WWF advisory panel examine these 1-
When it comes to the big picture the WWF harbours no doubt or uncertainty. It says it is “nearly impossible to overstate the threat of climate change” (see here, backup link here).
The IPCC, however, is supposed to be a neutral, objective scientific body. A judge presiding over a murder trial cannot party with the prosecution team during the evening. Similarly, IPCC personnel who are entrusted with the job of determining whether or not humanity is responsible for climate change should remain aloof from the lynch mob outside the jailhouse door.
In a 2008 document, the WWF said its panel of 130 “leading climate scientists” were
“mostly, but not exclusively, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
These particular scientists, therefore, are more than merely sympathetic to the WWF’s
What does this mean for the celebrated 2007 IPCC report – the one that secured the IPCC its Nobel Peace Prize? Let me give you a quick snapshot:
It means that nearly two-
It means that WWF-
It means that 15 chapters in the 2007 Climate Bible were led by WWF-
It means, ladies and gentlemen, that the IPCC has been infiltrated. It has been wholly and entirely compromised.
I’ve spent untold hours completing all the searching, cross-
Stayed tuned. This is going to be a wild ride.
|Past Was Warmer|
|NASA: 30's Hotter|
|Ocean Drives CO2?|
|Only 15% of current CO2|
|CO2 & Climate|
|CO2 & Climate|
|CO2, Solar, Oceans|
|CRU Emails - html formatted|
|CRU Emails Simple Format|
|CRU Emails UnFormatted|
|Hockey Stick Links|