Dr Melanie Phillips - Climate Change Expert, or Loopy Conspiracy Theorist?

Renowned climatologist Dr Melanie 'I hate all of you, especially you fuckin' Muslims' Phillips has been very vocal in her criticism of the consensus on climate change. Her detailed scientific studies have drawn her to the conclusion that it is all a scam dreamt up by 'loony' lefties with some kind of malicious agenda. Like many conspiracy theorists, Phillips believes there is a vast network of people intent on undermining Western society. Like all conspiracy theorists, this amounts to nothing more than the wild rantings of a person who has lost touch with reality and has entered the realms of fantasy.

One of the main sources for her incredulity towards scientific consensus, is Professor Richard Lindzen. Here is an example of the praise that Phillips heaps on her beloved Professor Lindzen:

The meteorologist Professor Richard Lindzen one [sic] again injects some much-needed sanity – and scientific rationalism – into the global warming frenzy in an article in Newsweek.

She repeatedly cites Lindzen as a figure of authority on global warming, but she never gives much detail about the man himself. I decided to take the liberty of doing a little research on Richard Lindzen, and I was unsurprised by what I discovered. He has links to numerous institutes that are in turn linked to ExxonMobil, the biggest climate change denier in the world. A group that has been directly responsible for muddying the waters in the fight to battle climate change. Lindzen is linked to the following:

The Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy - Member, Annapolis Center Science and Economic Advisory Council. Annapolis has received $200,000 from Exxon since 2003.

Cato Institute - Contributing Expert. The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC, was founded in 1977 by Edward Crane and Charles Koch, the billionaire co-owner of Koch Industries, the largest privately held oil company in the U.S. It has received $90,000 from Exxon since 2001.

Heartland Institute - Expert. Founded in the early 1990s, Heartland Institute claims to apply "cutting-edge research to state and local public policy issues." Additionally, Heartland bills itself as "the marketing arm of the free-market movement." Heartland has received $561,500 from Exxon since 1998.

George C. Marshall Institute - Writer. Founded in 1984, The George Marshall Institute primarily focused on defense issues, advocating funding for Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative and Star Wars. GMI has since branched out and is one of the leading think tanks trying to debunk climate change. Exxon has funded the institute to the tune of $630,000 since 1998.

Tech Central Station - Writer. The Foundation appears to be a funding arm of the free-market news site, TechCentralStation.com. Since establishment in 2002, it has received $95,000 from Exxon.

So, hardly a reliable source of information then. All the above was taken from Exxon Secrets. There is a link with all the information above, here (click 'skip intro'). And here's what they say about Lindzen himself:

Dr. Lindzen was a member of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and contributed to the Second Assessment Report. He regularly takes issue with the general conclusions drawn from the IPCC's reports. His prolific writings assert that climate change science is inconclusive, and he has testified multiple times before Congress.

Ross Gelbspan reported in 1995 that Lindzen "charges oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels, and a speech he wrote, entitled 'Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,' was underwritten by OPEC." ("The Heat is On: The warming of the world's climate sparks a blaze of denial," Harper's magazine, December 1995.)[emphasis mine]

Lindzen signed the 1995 Leipzig Declaration.

In other words, not a source that is to be trusted. Not that Dr Melanie 'barking mad' Phillips would give you such information to allow her readers to make informed decisions about the sources she quotes. That would just make her look like a mad conspiracy theorist, wouldn't it?