|
We reported earlier in the year how claims that a 'denial lobby' had influenced public opinion on climate change were totally at odds with reality.
The UK's Royal Society, for example wrote an open letter
to Exxon in 2006, accusing it of funding these sceptics. The image of
oil barons distorting the truth for pure profit was appealing to an
environmental movement desperate to account for its own lack of popular
appeal. Through their site 'Exxon Secrets', Greenpeace 'exposed' the
millions of dollars that had allegedly been given to think tanks and
other deniers to brainwash an unthinking, gullible public.
But as we pointed out, the $22 million that Exxon allegedly gave away between 1998 and 2008 is peanuts compared to Greenpeace's $2.2 billion income over a similar period.
Following
our post yesterday about the WWF's use of a rather dodgy scientific
measure to secure headlines and public attention, we thought we'd have
a quick scan of their accounts, too.
Year
|
Income ($US)
|
URL
|
2003
|
370,245,000
|
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwffinancialrpt2004.pdf |
2004
|
468,889,000 |
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwfintar005.pdf |
2005
|
499,629,000
|
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwfannualreport.pdf |
2006
|
549,827,000 |
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_ar06_final_28feb.pdf |
2007
|
663,193,000 |
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/wwf_annual_review_07.pdf |
TOTAL
|
2,551,783,000 |
|
The
accounts prior to 2003 aren't available online. (If you have access to
them, we would be grateful if you would let us have a look). But the
point stands. The WWF has an enormous amount of money behind it - far
more than any dirty 'denialist' organisation has been able to get its
hands on.
Even more surprising is the source of their funding.
One thing that might be said in Greenpeace's defence is that it
apparently doesn't accept money from Governments. But a closer look at
WWF's regional sites shows that a significant amount of funding does
come from the state. For example, WWF USA:
Read rest....
|