Who is cfact

The archive contains 3, documents, some 27, pages, covering organizations and individuals. The current archive includes mainly documents collected in the late s through the early s by The Clearinghouse on Environmental Advocacy and Research CLEAR , an organization that tracked the rise of the so called "Wise Use" movement in the s during the Clinton presidency.

Access the index to the Anti-Environmental Archives here. Retrieved on Navigation menu Personal tools Log in. Namespaces Page Discussion. Views Read View source View history. This page was last edited on 25 December , at And, we reject it. However, kids are being spoon-fed a version of science that does not comport with reality.

Instead, they callously continued to produce oil and gas without informing investors and the public of dire climate change consequences. Chamber of Commerce and dozens more. The Guardian also analysed and reported on the Peabody bankruptcy findings : [69].

Meanwhile, Americans for Prosperity campaigns against carbon pricing. The Oklahoma chapter was on the list. DeSMog was later told by attendees that the theatre was only 70 percent full. I am trying to find another layer of scientist whose stories have not been out there yet.

You will see a lot of new names in this. This campaign seeks to show students the real facts about climate change, and empower them to bring the discussion to their campus. Issues like the Medieval warm period, different possible causes of climate change such as solar activity, or even the nature of our climate , studies indicating the last interglacial period was warmer than today, and the failure of recent dire predictions about the climate all show the debate on climate change is not nearly as settled as many global warming proponents would have us believe.

Almost no research has been done to determine if climate change is a natural phenomenon, and recent studies indicate there has been no global warming in the last 19 years. Some scientists are even saying we are nearing the beginning of a new period of global cooling. This collegiate grassroots campaign is meant to increase awareness about climate change issues, and give college students the facts they need to intelligently debate man made global warming advocates.

Additional funds would go to a spoiler film by Marc Morano. Scientifically they get it, politically they get it and particularly when it comes to the United Nations, they get it. They are pulling out of this, they are repealing their carbon tax and Canada seems to be intrigued by what Australia is doing. I hesitate to call them scientists because they have abandoned their scientific principals by which their guess about temperature increases and the cause could achieve scientific acceptance or rejection.

Accompanying them was prominent climate change skeptic Lord Christopher Monckton. Bush did not attend. With the new name came a redesigned website, highly produced web videos, and an organized network of churches to distribute climate change denying propaganda to hundreds of pastors around the country.

As of May, : [94]. Box Washington, DC Website by SeriousOtters. International US UK. Facebook-f Twitter. Approximately 15 percent published in the recognizable refereed literature on subjects related to climate science. Approximately 80 percent clearly had no refereed publication record on climate science at all.

Approximately 4 percent appeared to favor the current IPCC consensus and should not have been on the list. Steele Y James M. Fish and Wildlife Service retired. Member, Agenda 21 Joseph D. Patrick J. Robert A. Balling Jr.

Y Y Y Professor, Dept. Call that real climate denial. In other words, global temperatures have essentially held very steady with no sign of acceleration. Charles, Jr. Wilson Roy W. Botkin Patrick Moore Don J. Easterbrook Robert M. Briggs Roger Pielke Sr. Walter Cunningham Patrick J. Archived May 1, Archived March 14, Archived September 21, Graham Readfearn. View full text PDF. Accessed May 1, Cindy Baxter. Archived February 5, Archived September 22, Accessed September 21, Archived April 21, Data on file at DeSmog.

Paul Driessen. September 22, Archived September 24, Archived December 20, Case bk, document page of page in PDF. Archived November 5, Archived July 15, Archived July 10, Archived December 27, Craig Rucker.

Archived March 9, Archived March 9. Alex Newman. Archived December 7, Archived December 11, Archived September 17, Archived September 13, Senator Whitehouse. Archived February 20, Retrieved from Mailchimp. Archived July 7, Susanne Goldberg. Archived May 12, Archived November 21, Jim Lakely.

Archived July 14, Originally posted at Climate Investigations Center. Brendan Demelle. Retrieved from the Heartland Institute. Click here to view this organization's Forms on the IRS website if any are available. This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact. Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that we have not yet evaluated the organization.

Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that the organization has not yet submitted data for evaluation.

This score provides an assessment of the organization's engagement with the constituents it serves, a practice we term Constituent Feedback. When organizations listen to constituents, they are able to better deliver on programs and meet the needs of stakeholders. A future version of this Beacon will also assess an organization's people operations and its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion DEI metrics. Nonprofit organizations are encouraged to fill out the How We Listen section of their Candid profile.

Constituent Feedback and Listening Practice data are not available for this organization. Charity Navigator believes nonprofit organizations that engage in inclusive practices, such as collecting feedback from the people and communities they serve, may be more effective.

We award every nonprofit that completes the Candid survey full credit for this Beacon, in recognition of their willingness to publicly share this information with the nonprofit and philanthropic communities. Although the data is not evaluated for quality at this time, future iterations of this Beacon will include third party or other data that will serve to validate the information provided by the nonprofit.

Our partnership with Feedback Labs and Guidestar by Candid , and other partners including Fund for Shared Insight, GlobalGiving, and Keystone Accountability, enables us to launch the first version of this beacon with Constituent Feedback information collected on Candid's site. Feedback practices have been shown to support better Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion outcomes, an essential area of assessment that we intend to further expand and develop in the future.

Feedback Labs has documented several studies which indicate that beyond achieving organizational goals, nonprofits that are attentive and responsive to concerns and ideas raised by beneficiaries establish stronger relationships with the people they serve, promote greater equity, and empower constituents in ways that can help to ensure better long-term outcomes.

You can find resources to help nonprofits improve their feedback practices here. The Giving Basket is having a some issues. If you wish to donate, please refresh the page. Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow.

You are viewing this organization's new Charity Navigator profile page. To view the legacy version, click here. Needs Improvement. Star Rated Report. Financial Performance Metrics.

Fundraising Expenses. Fundraising Efficiency. Working Capital Ratio. Program Expense Growth. Liabilities to Assets. Program Expense. Program Expense Ratio Administrative Expenses 8. Fundraising Expenses Liabilities to Assets Ratio 5. Working Capital Ratio 0. Program Expense Growth Governance Charity Navigator looks to confirm on the Form that the organization has these governance practices in place.

More The presence of an independent governing body is strongly recommended by many industry professionals to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters.

Our analysts check the Form to determine if the independent Board members are a voting majority and also at least five in number. Less No Material Diversion of Assets More A diversion of assets — any unauthorized conversion or use of the organization's assets other than for the organization's authorized purposes, including but not limited to embezzlement or theft — can seriously call into question a charity's financial integrity. This metric will be assigned to one of the following categories: Full Credit: There has been no diversion of assets within the last two years.

Partial Credit: There has been a diversion of assets within the last two years and the charity has used Schedule O on the Form to explain: the nature of the diversion, the amount of money or property involved and the corrective action taken to address the matter. In this situation, we deduct 7 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. No Credit: There has been a diversion of assets within the last two years and the charity's explanation on Schedule O is either non-existent or not sufficient.

In this case, we deduct 15 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. More Audited financial statements provide important information about financial accountability and accuracy.

Partial Credit: The charity's audited financials were prepared by an independent accountant, but it did not have an audit oversight committee. In this case, we deduct 7 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. No Credit: The charity did not have its audited financials prepared by an independent accountant. More Making loans to related parties such as key officers, staff, or Board members, is not standard practice in the sector as it may divert the charity's funds away from its charitable mission and can lead to real and perceived conflict-of-interest problems.

This practice is discouraged by sector trade groups which point to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act when they call for charities to refrain from making loans to directors and executives.

And the IRS is concerned enough with the practice that it requires charities to disclose on their Form any loans to or from current and former officers, directors, trustees, key employees, and other "disqualified persons.

Furthermore, it is problematic because it is an indicator that the organization is not financially secure. Less Documents Board Meeting Minutes More An official record of the events that take place during a board meeting ensures that a contemporaneous document exists for future reference.

Charities are not required to make their Board meeting minutes available to the public. As such, we are not able to review and critique their minutes. For this performance metric, we are checking to see if the charity reports on its Form that it does keep those minutes.

In the future, we will also track and rate whether or not a charity keeps minutes for its committee meetings. Less Distributes to Board Before Filing More Providing copies of the Form to the governing body in advance of filing is considered a best practice, as it allows for thorough review by the individuals charged with overseeing the organization. The Form asks the charity to disclose whether or not it has followed this best practice.

If the charity has not distributed its Form to the board before filing, then we deduct 4 points from its Accountability and Transparency score. Less Compensates Board More The IRS requires that any compensation paid to members of the charity's governing body be listed on the Form Furthermore, all members of the governing body need to be listed whether or not they are compensated.