News and Commentary

Report: Top Global Warming Center Faked Research to Bag Million$ from Taxpayers

The seedy unscientific reality behind the trillion-dollar global warming industry has been exposed a little more after one of the world’s leading climate change research centers was caught reportedly stealing millions of taxpayer dollars for fraudulent research.

The prestigious London School of Economics recently bagged about $11 million from UK taxpayers in research grant money for its Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP), an entity that has raised some $37 million since 2008. But after a little closer scrutiny, it appears that the research for which the center was awarded the massive infusion of dollars was actually not even conducted by CCCEP. Instead, it was allegedly “stolen” from rival researchers and some of it was conducted before the taxpayer money was handed over.

“Many papers CCCEP claimed to have published to get government money weren’t about global warming, were written before the organization was even founded, or were written by researchers unaffiliated with CCCEP,” the Daily Caller explains. “The government never checked CCCEP’s supposed publication lists, saying they were ‘taken on trust,’ according to the report.”

The fraud was exposed by The Daily Mail, who spoke with one climate economics expert from Sussex University whose work was allegedly plagiarized by CCCEP.

“It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven’t supported, and it’s fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant.”

Professor Richard Tol

“It is serious misconduct to claim credit for a paper you haven’t supported, and it’s fraud to use that in a bid to renew a grant. I’ve never come across anything like it before. It stinks,” Professor Richard Tol told The Daily Mail. “Our paper had no relationship to the CCCEP. At the time, the CCCEP did not exist, and it only came into existence after the paper was published. Fraud means deception for financial gain. That is what this is.”

Several other damning realities of the climate change research funding racket are highlighted by the case, including the predetermined nature of the studies and the fact that as much as half of public sector funding depends on getting positive results. In other words, researchers have overwhelming financial incentive to “prove” their politically-charged, predetermined premises. ​As TheDC highlights, another particularly troubling aspect of research receiving public funds is that researchers do not have to disclose any ethical conflicts of interest.