Home » Climate change » Climategate: Money laundering?

Climategate: Money laundering?

I make no accusation, I am simply asking a question passed on to me by a reader. The reader copied this divulged e-mail on to me.

Also, it is important for us if you can transfer the ADVANCE money on the personal accounts which we gave you earlier and the sum for one occasion transfer (for example, during one day) will not be more than 10,000 USD. Only in this case we can avoid big taxes and use money for our work as much as possible. Please, inform us what kind of documents and financial reports we must represent you and your administration for these money.

Schemes to avoid taxes may be illegal in some jurisdictions, and I would welcome clarification on the point, to assure that they are not, and that these people have done no such wrong.

My best guess is that the climategate folk are in enough trouble already, so …

I am told that Dr. Keith Briffa would be the go to guy for clarification on this.

Note: In my view, climate change is not an ID issue – whether it is occurring or not, whether it is caused by man or not.

Our reason for watching this brief  is rather the extent to which scientists may have collaborated to prevent a full and fair evaluation of the evidence.

If they do it with climate change, they might also do it with Darwinism, cancer research, and any number of other areas.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

8 Responses to Climategate: Money laundering?

  1. These are all things that need investigation immediately. And as I have said before if there are any US scientists who skewed data- and are using federal grants- then that is breaking federal law and there needs to be an FBI investigation and people need to be charged accordingly under federal law. This is one of the most important issues in the world- and FOR the world and this kind of abuse cannot go unpunished. The laws need to be upheld to prevent this from going on in the future. There is way too much at stake- and this is premeditated collusion, abuse of power- and who knows how many laws were broken if those models were skewed or falsified.

    And for us to find out that this group of scientists were ACTUALLY ABLE TO MAKE CLAIMS ABOUT AGW WITHOUT ANY AUDIT OR TRANSPARENCY WHATSOEVER IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!

    Whoever is even allowing these people to dictate world policy with their falsified data- completely unaudited- needs to be investigated as well.

    This is just about the biggest scandal of our time. I did see one conspiracy nut, however, online arguing that the 911 scandal (conspiracy) was bigger- but for those of us STILL attached to reality I think this one is bigger simply because the proof is obvious and manifest that this actually happened and is happening.

    And once again this is bigger than the Madoff scandal because it effects more money and more people – globally.

  2. Looking forward to 911gate.

  3. Note: In my view, climate change is not an ID issue – whether it is occurring or not, whether it is caused by man or not.

    An ID is certainly not a climate issue! Every climate sceptic I have engaged with is also very sceptical about ID.

  4. The post’s title mentions money laundering (processing illegally gotten money so as to conceal its source), but the body of the post is about avoiding taxes. Tax avoidance is legal and something we all do, organizing our finances so as to reduce the amount liable for tax and is not the same as tax evasion – the deceitful mis-statement of our finances to the same aim. So it’s unclear what allegation is not being made, and I would welcome clarification on the point.

    The e-mail seems to be advice by a Russian scientist to a British colleague on how to reduce the amount of presumably taxpayers’ dollars which would suffer Russian tax during transfer. This seems like a reasonable step to put money to use how it was intended, and certainly it was not the scientists’ job to maximize the Russian tax authority’s take of taxpayer money earmarked for climate research. But any readers with a knowledge of Russian tax law and any money tranfers which took place following the e-mail will have more insight.

  5. Aww man, being new to this site, I have to say that the posts over the past fews days have turned me off. It’s a well-known fact that just posing a question will skew people toward believing that the question answer to the question is “yes.”

    If I were to type: “John Smith: pedophile?” as my headline, and then say, “I’m not making any accusations; I’m just posing a question someone asked me,” that would be a dirty, dirty trick. The tactics I’ve seen people using on this website don’t mesh well with how I was taught to behave by my community and by my religion, so I will have to see if things get any better over the next few days before I decide to stick around or not.

  6. Not only do I agree with the framing that Retroman talks about, but it’s bizarre to think that “If they do it with climate change, they might also do it with Darwinism, cancer research, and any number of other areas.” Many of “them” (not “us” assuredly) who are doing climate research are most likely not doing a lot of biochemistry, the current battleground for ID. And certainly intelligent design scientists are scientists, no?

  7. The questions I would want answered are:

    1) Are educational grants from other countries subject to taxation?
    2) Why is money being sent to “personal accounts” rather than to the university or research lab of the scientists?

    The Bank Secrecy Act in the United States requires banks to report transactions of $10,000 or more in cash. If people attempt to hide transfers of large amounts of cash, by breaking the money up into smaller bundles, they are using a technique called structuring. Other countries have similar laws. Wikipedia has an article about this method of fraud.

    In another email Dr. Keith Briffa writes, “I am also sending Stepan’s 5000 dollars to Switzerland now to be carried back by his colleague.”

    Why not send the money directly to the source rather than use an intermediary?

    Lastly, I wonder if diversion of research grant money is a wide scale problem and does it happen among researchers supporting evolution.

  8. “for those of us STILL attached to reality”

    Yeah, and for those of us that are still attached to SCIENCE, the EVIDENCE that 911 was an inside job is astounding. I thought we believed in following the evidence where it lead? Your reaction to 911, is the same that AGW’ers have towards you. Maybe you should think of that!

    http://www.ae911truth.org/

Leave a Reply