What is S.Fred Singer's Current Source of Income?

Question

Here's his C.V.:

http://www.sepp.org/about%20sepp/bios/singer/cvsfs.html

Since 1989 it appears to be his Science and Environmental Policy Project, which his C.V. describes as a "Foundation-funded, independent research group".

Does that equate to science for hire?

He has written books on oil pricing and consulted to EXXON, Shell, Unocal, Sun Oil, ARCO, which is qualified on his C.V. as "in the late '70s", but Exxon reported giving his SEPP organization $20,000 ($10k each in 1998 and 2000).

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=65

As an author, he has not only written books on oil pricing but in March 2007 he published "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years".

The Heartland Institute chose Dr. Singer as the keynote speaker for their 2008 International Conference on Climate Change earlier this month. But going on 19 years as "foundation-funded", should he be presented as a scientist, or is he currently more of a lobbyist or PR consultant?

Answer 1

Let's agree that any scientist who accepts money for research is in the pocket of the money source.

The US government funds pro-global warming research al least 1000:1 more than all oil companies combined.  We can therefore expect 1000 pro-AGW lies for every anti-AGW lie.

I can accept your logic.  Can you?

Answer 2

I think what people have to say should be weighted on its own merits, and that attempting to by-pass questions by virtue of attacking the questioner is transparent.

I also think that you're making a lot of hay out of donations to non-profits that represent very little to multinational corporations - in fact very little to someone with a Ph.D and a career in science.   $20K?    I have more than that in my checking account.

Answer 3

I wonder the same thing about Dr. James Hansen.  Here's a man who is supposed to represent the tax payers best interest who is selling his "science" to the highest bidder.

He sold his endorsement to John Kerry's Presidential campaign for a cool $250,000.00, he (in his own words) exaggerated the claims of global warming to "shock" more people into being aware of the issue.

He's a paid consultant on movies like "Truth" and "Day After".

And he works with TWC to develop stories to pull in more viewers by making claims that could never come true.

Plus he made millions lying about being muzzled when clearly he wasn't.

There should be a full investigation into his practices and Hansen should step down from his current position.

Answer 4

Well he hasn't done any research of his own for over a decade, unless you count misrepresenting other scientists' findings as 'research'.

At this point his income come sfrom the SEPP, which has received funds from both the tobacco and oil industries.

Suffice it to say that Singer's opinions on global warming should be taken with a grain of salt, just like his opinions on secondhand smoke, acid rain, and the effects of CFCs on the ozone layer.  Basically Singer will take whatever position is most beneficial for industry, regardless of what the scientific evidence says.

Answer 5

Keep in mind this is the Group Bush set up thinking he could intice major scientists away from IPCC to adopt his position that Global Warming was unproven.  It didn't happen and he abandoned his rediculous stance on the issue after sandbagging research and law enforcement for 8 years.

John Coleman?  The burnout who founded the weather channel?  Give me a break!

Answer 6

But still more qualified than Gore on the subject.... LMAO....  ROTFLMAO

$10,000 a year for two years is corrupt????

I think promising BILLIONS in taxpayer money to prove global warming is CORRUPT!!!!

Answer 7

Again, Jello misrepresents Hansen and Larry misrepresents the significance of Gore.  Hansen works for NASA and publishes real scientific papers which are highly regarded (around the world) by other climate scientists.  As a government employee he has strict ethical rules that he abides by and despite Jellos deceptive assertions, he's still in his position in good standing.

Foundation-funded and independent research group are buzzwords for science for hire.  Does anyone think Singer can simultaneously be an expert on the health effects of tobacco and climate change (consequently opposing both the mainstream position and supporting the position that earns money for big industries)?

http://www.ecosyn.us/adti/Singer-1993-19...

Answer 8

I think it is very well established there is more money to be made supporting the theory of AGW than apposing it.