Edit:
It is interesting that the warmers use the paultry money from the Koch brothers in their argument. Sure, some oil companies do not like the idea of moving away from oil as a source of energy. BUT, we are talking about more expensive energy. We are talking about the government forcing more expensive energy onto society. For the energy companies, this is a windfall. They absolutely love it and the money being funneled to AGW is enormous. It so far exceeds the money being given to "deniers" as to make the entire debate about the money from the Koch brothers a running joke. Only someone entirely engrained in their own political view would ever argue that people should not be able to spend their own millions, while the government spends billions of our money.
Fact is that energy sources like solar are coming down in cost and will soon become competitive in the US market and then the global market. This is occurring already. My problem is not with solar or other renewable resources. I think they are certainly the way to go. My problem is artificially forcing their production of "clean energy" "solutions" before they are ready for the sole purpose of making next to no change in CO2 emissions while screwing up our economy, all of this being done on the back of the middle class as they attempt to create regressive taxes.
Will depend on who employs the scientists. Universities will accept funding from private and government sources. Employees for government agencies will most likely carry out most their work from government sources.
Note that this funding is not "personal" money for these scientists. The funding is for their work, however they will be on a wage (that will not be increased with the funding). They may be employed for longer because of the funding, or be given more resources.
Lastly, scientists in countries such as Australia and the USA have been publishing research that is supportive of AGW for over 20 years. The USA government only supported this theory in the last 5 or so years, and it was a similar situation in Australia. If there is science to dismiss their evidence by all means present it ... there is far more money available to the first scientists to dismiss AGW then any further studies that support it.
Therefore this argument is moot, as the old adage of "following the money" would lead scientists to a different answer (it is far more profitable for government's to ignore the issue and the most profitable businesses in the world also would rather the science suggest otherwise).
Not necessarily from Governments. When global bankers and investors are involved, then we get a convoluted money exchange along with a convoluting of the information.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Gran...
" ... Grantham has repeatedly stated that the rising cost of energy - the most fundamental commodity - between 2002 and 2008 has falsely inflated economic growth and GDP figures worldwide and that we have been in a "carbon bubble" for approximately the last 250 years in which energy was very cheap. He believes that this bubble is coming to an end. He has stated his opposition to the Keystone Pipeline on the basis of the ruinous environmental consequences that its construction will bring to Alberta and to the entire planet due to the contribution that burning the extracted oil would make to climate change. ... "
The man knows nothing about climate science, but knows how to funnel money to it. There is no other profitable avenue for climate science unless money is funneled through our banking system. It's a laughable proposition to think BIG BUSINESS is only BIG OIL and connected industries. "Government Banking" has always been a way to subvert monetary investments. Trust your "Government Funded Science" all you want. LOL! There is a bigger picture that most can't even fathom.
Tom Steyer is another multi-billionaire who has dedicated a lot of money towards climate science. It's not just about "Global Warming". It's about "having POWER to control the POWER"!
"Cheap energy" is a threat to those who currently "hold" the POWER.
Does it ever occur to anyone supporting AGW how the monetary system works in regards to energy investments, especially when business execs just "sit-on-their-bums" figuring out ways to make money?
That's why "Climate Science" is nothing but a bunch of "climate clowns".
Majority of Gevernment Funding is primarily built from taxtation and international funding. In most cases, if a project that is being funded by the government becomes inconclusive and/or non-successful; than the project than will be shut down. Also, in most cases; a lot of "classified" projects tend to have a cover name and story to gain support from their citizens and viewers to gain profit to financially suport their personal agenda. This is in fact illegal, but it does in fact occur.
Global warming does in fact NOT exist. Mainly it is called "Global Change". Global change happerns every few thousand years. Earth has its cycles--the core will cool and than will get hot. Hense the "Ice Age" and "Global Warming". Mind you that the Earth is an old organism. It will shift, rotate at certain odd degrees, and temperature with change due to core temperature and the position and distance to the Sun's rotation. Also, Cities such as New York, Tokyo, Phoenix, Seattle, Dallas, Beijing, etc.--are more likely to be hotter than rual areas. This is due to high concentration of buildings, glass, metal, and asphalt (things that can absorb and bounce heat). Honestly, the only way to prevent "Global Polution" is to permentanly stop the use of technology and live life how our ancestors had lived. So technically, there is absolutly no way to save earth from polution and this so called "Global Warming."
I do hope this answers your question.
You mean the ones who are weaving a conspiracy to destroy the economy and make David Koch sad? I don't know if you are, but those ones get their money from media Jews and the Taliban.
You don't understand. Money from the government is good. Money from corporations is bad and it corrupts. You can trust anything the government tells you but can't believe anything from a corporation especially if you can link it to Exxon Mobil or Cheney with 6 degrees of separation. Money borrowed from our grandchildren would never be used to deceive. It is our right to spend our grandchildren's money as we see fit. We are saving the planet.
OK just in case someone thinks I am serious, I am not but that is the limited logic we get from most alarmists. I should point out that the cost if far more than that. Their attacks on our energy have boosted costs and certainly have or will cost trillion(s).
George Soros and the agencies he fronts for. From governments, wasting our tax money.
from the ruling elite
Does most of it come from governments?
Does all government money go to alarmists who promote government power?
From the Science and Environmental Policy Project:
Based US government reports, SEPP calculated that from Fiscal Year (FY) 1993 to FY 2013 total US expenditures on climate change amount to more than $165 Billion. More than $35 Billion is identified as climate science. The White House reported that in FY 2013 the US spent $22.5 Billion on climate change. About $2 Billion went to US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The principal function of the USGCRP is to provide to Congress a National Climate Assessment (NCA). The latest report uses global climate models, which are not validated, therefor speculative, to speculate about regional influences from global warming.
Much of the remaining 89% of funding goes to goes to government agencies and industries claiming they are preventing global warming/climate change, even though they do not understand the natural causes of climate change and, likely, far overestimate the influence of CO2. These entities have a vested interest in promoting the fear of global warming/climate change.
It is time for the government to stop funding irrational fear of global warming/climate change based on a concept of climate that is not substantiated by the physical evidence.
