As I understand those numbers are now known for people like Anthony Watts and several lead deniers.
Although they claimed for quite a while to not be funded, Watts has since tried to claim the money is to run his website, but given his website is a formula design, very similar to several other lead denier sites and using a basic blog layout, it's pretty obvious where the large sums of money are really going.
For all the years of denier talk of "scientists doing it for the money" it turns out that denier scientists (the few that there are) get for the equivalent of a few weeks 'consulting' work as much as most scientists get as a yearly salary.
I assume your question is pushing the denier line that "a few scientists are lying to and fooling the rest" this is absurd, as scientists are all highly trained and as knowledgeable as the few, deniers have deluded themselves into thinking are doing this, no scientific paper is an isolated work it is followed by many others that work on the theory (whatever that theory is) and enforce it or disprove it. AGW has gone through that process with now several thousand papers involving many thousands of scientists looking at every detail and the theory stands, which I'm sure irritates deniers, so now they attack peer review as that is the childish nature of denial.
Case in point, the hockeystick graph,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11...
the continuing denier fiction is that it is either discredited or disproved, when in fact it has been followed by over a dozen works that confirmed it and supported it's findings. Of course ask deniers what they base their claims on and you get either blogs, abuse or silence. Which sadly sums up most of the denier case.
A minimum for any profit-minded scientist would be the equivalent of your career earnings, because you're out of a job, permanently. Take a look at medical research, where the info is murkier and the potential profits are larger.
Misinformation campaigns on the other hand can be done repeatedly for either profit or ideology.
Ask Richard Lindzen, Patrick Michaels, Fred Singer and Tim Ball how much they are being paid.
False information causes death and destruction or at a minimum waste and degradation.
I will not be party to disseminating false "scientific" data.
The Drug Companies have been perfecting that for decades and now we have Obama Care shoveling your assets into their pockets while their "medications" are forced onto the stupid and often kills them.
Al Gore got rich and so do the Oil Companies. Which of them does YOU the most good? Which does you the most harm?
Time will tell, but I'm betting Both of those two frauds are Wrong.
In order to "fake" a scientific paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, you would first need to invest years and 100s of thousands of dollars in obtaining the needed education and experience. That eliminates everyone who is not already a scientist - and you will only find a few who will consider you offer. Ask McIntyre and McKittrick what Exxon is paying.
James Hansen is being sued, as we write, about taking over a million dollars in payoffs for his advocacy. Obama just gave $100 Billion to the UN in the name of GW. There is big money in this scam, make no doubts about it.
Quote by Eduardo Tonni, paleontologist, Committee for Scientific Research, Argentina: “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.”
Quote by George Kukla, climatologist, research scientist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University: "The only thing to worry about is the damage that can be done by worrying. Why are some scientists worried? Perhaps because they feel that to stop worrying may mean to stop being paid."
Quote by James Spann, American Meteorological Society-certified meteorologist: "Billions of dollars of grant money [over $50 billion] are flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story."
I would need at least an average salary and I could easily convince myself it was ok on the grounds that, as no real science supports agw and anyone with an open mind could easily debunk it, it wouldn't be my fault if people just accepted any old nonsense they were spoon fed.
We all need to earn a wage and there are many many jobs and industries which rely on bullshite, take gmo's for example.
I probably wouldn't do it no matter how much you pay me. There is more to life than money and one of the things I advocate is clean drinking water to poor countries to save lives. I encourage industrialization because people in developed countries have: access to clean water; the ability to eliminate their waste safely; access to medical treatment; a longer life span.
I couldn't live with myself knowing that I was advocating a hoax in which the consequences might cost millions of people their lives.
I would want exactly the same as all the IPCC are getting. Political organisations always pay themselves well. Plus expenses of course.
Ask Rupert Murdoch - he has hundreds making a fortune peddling lies & misinformation
Ask Sagebrush how much he gets paid to post inane lies such as ; "Obama just gave $100 Billion to the UN in the name of GW."
Or inane BS such as " James Hansen is being sued, as we write, about taking over a million dollars in payoffs for his advocacy."
And the hypocrite pretends to be a Christian
What would be your personal price? To either fake a scientific paper, or to run a misinformation campaign? What would it take to make you tell a really big lie, and keep on telling it?
"There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers." - the killing of innocent people is set as equal to lies in the Bible. How much money would it take for you to kill? A dollar?
According to the Dookie you don't have to pay me at all.
I don't know. How much is Big Oil offering nowadays?
Not a lot because it makes no difference what I say anyway. it's just talk no-one does anything, except taxes and they always do anyway.
Ask a Republican. I've no experience of that sort of money.
I'd do that for a dollar.
