So Gore is pushing back against the letter from 400 scientists — some of whom are his co-recipients of the Nobel Prize — by saying that up to 30 of them received funding from Exxon-Mobil. I’ve never quite understood how this argument is supposed to work. Are the “good” scientists who receive money from environmental groups and foundations “objective” even though their interest in the global warming narrative is no less vested (and usually more so) than Exxon’s is combating it. I mean is Al Gore himself “objective”? His place in history and his standing in American life rests almost entirely on his global warming prophecies. Of all people, why does he get to be the honest broker? Besides, if 30 of the signatories got money from Exxon-Mobil that means 370 didn’t. Are they biased because of what somebody else on their “side” thinks? Or because somebody else is conceivably on the take? If that’s the case why can’t I play the same game with Gore and say that because he is on the same side as countless environmental whack jobs (which no honest person disputes), his views are as illegitimate as those of members of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement and Earth First!