And Michaels not only worked for the CATO institute, which receives funding from Exxon. The quarterly he edits, (World Climate Report) is funded by Western Fuels, through the GREENING EARTH SOCIETY. He also was a visiting scientist for the George C. Marshall Institute, which received $80,000 from ExxonMobile for its Global Climate Change Program in 2002.
There is a conflict of interest, even though you believe the energy industry is not attempting to profit from their findings, and that the researchers will not continue to please these companies in order to get more $$$ in the future.
I didn't make those comments, but I think Gail Wynand's point was not to smear or compliment Zhou, but to take issue with the scope of his findings; that is, what you took his findings to show.
This is different than making ad hominem argument against Michaels or McKitrick, even a consistent one. The premise that privately funded scientists somehow are suppsoed to be by definition compromised while scientists funded by NGO's or the government has been shown to be mistaken by James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock in Public Choice economics. And it's a good thing, too , or else, using the same reaoning, we would have to distrust private school teachers more than public school teachers, PBS MacNeil-Leher News Hour more than Special Report, All Things Considered's Nina Totenberg more than Micheal Barone. I would submit this would be a bad idea. You seem to know quite a bit about this issue-- my impression is that you can hold your own without imputing base motives without evidence.