Craig Hill
KC Hill
Paladin
Oracle of DelphiFunding - not Bribery
February 6th 2007 00:10
The Sydney Morning Herald has recently published what I consider to be one of the most outrageous pieces of left wing diatribe masquerading as news I have ever seen.
The headline is "Bribes offered to scientists" . From that headline and from the definition of 'bribe' vis "Money, property, or a favor given, offered, or promised to a person or accepted by a person in a position of trust as an inducement to dishonest behavior" we would be forgiven for believing that someone has done something illegal here.
But no, if we read further into the article we discover that the conservative American think tank, AEI, is offering funding to scientists who wish to contribute to the climate change debate with evidence which runs counter to the current hysteria which is sweeping the world faster that an El Nino windstorm.
So the AEI is offering to fund genuine scientific work by reputable scientists which supports a view which just happens to be out of favour at the moment. There's nothing unethical or underhand about that.
According to the lefties at the SMH, giving money to science which supports the doomsday climate change model is 'funding'. Giving money to anyone who disagrees which that model is 'bribery'!
The SMH article describes AEI as "ExxonMobil-funded think tank". That's just plain misleading. The AEI attracted an income of $US39 million in 2005 (the latest figures available on their website) The SMH article claims that AEI has received 1.6 million from Exxon Mobil. It doesn't say over what time period. By any reasonable standard it's misleading to claim that the AEI is ExxonMobil-funded.
The SMH article implies that AEI is working for ExxonMobil and bribing scientists to write misleading articles which deny climate change. This implication is false and misleading in the extreme.
The headline is "Bribes offered to scientists" . From that headline and from the definition of 'bribe' vis "Money, property, or a favor given, offered, or promised to a person or accepted by a person in a position of trust as an inducement to dishonest behavior" we would be forgiven for believing that someone has done something illegal here.
But no, if we read further into the article we discover that the conservative American think tank, AEI, is offering funding to scientists who wish to contribute to the climate change debate with evidence which runs counter to the current hysteria which is sweeping the world faster that an El Nino windstorm.
So the AEI is offering to fund genuine scientific work by reputable scientists which supports a view which just happens to be out of favour at the moment. There's nothing unethical or underhand about that.
According to the lefties at the SMH, giving money to science which supports the doomsday climate change model is 'funding'. Giving money to anyone who disagrees which that model is 'bribery'!
The SMH article describes AEI as "ExxonMobil-funded think tank". That's just plain misleading. The AEI attracted an income of $US39 million in 2005 (the latest figures available on their website) The SMH article claims that AEI has received 1.6 million from Exxon Mobil. It doesn't say over what time period. By any reasonable standard it's misleading to claim that the AEI is ExxonMobil-funded.
The SMH article implies that AEI is working for ExxonMobil and bribing scientists to write misleading articles which deny climate change. This implication is false and misleading in the extreme.
| 90 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Content on this site is written and mediated by Craig Hill
Go to Craig Hill's home page for information about corporate training courses, university preparation courses and writing services available
Go to Craig Hill's home page for information about corporate training courses, university preparation courses and writing services available
