Columbia University Spends $5.7 Million Taxpayer Dollars on Fictitious Climate Change Games

Politicians on the left will spare no expense to push a political agenda, this time spending nearly $5.7 million of taxpayer’s money to promote the supposed dangers of climate change.

The $5,655,000 five-year grant authorized by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2012 was given to Columbia University’s Climate Center’s “PoLAR Climate Change Education Partnership” in order to portray a dystopian future created by global-warming. The purpose of the grant is to “engage adult learners and inform public understanding and response to climate change,” by using “games and game-like approaches [to] motivate exploration and learning of complex material,” according to the grant’s description.

The result was the creation of, a website filled with fake voicemails, videos, emails, and games that depict a horrible future in which the standard of living is reduced to the purchasing of CO2 credits in 2032 and where macaroni and cheese becomes a delicacy  in 2037 because of climate change. Luckily for the sake of mankind and mac & cheese aficionados, the ‘fine print’ admits that “FutureCoast is a work of fiction,” not so lucky for the taxpayers footing the bill.

Fear not taxpaying citizens, the future isn’t all that bad. In 2035, a weeping man illustrates a future filled with sky malls. Better yet, every child has miniature panda by 2059! And to think it only cost taxpayers $5,655,000 to envision this fictitious future.

“The NSF has funded too many questionable grants at the expense of higher priority research… it is not the government’s money; it is the people’s money,” said Representative Lamar Smith (R-Texas) in a statement made to the Free Beacon.

If the government insists on spending millions of the people’s money on bogus ‘educational’ campaigns, it is not global-warming that future generations will have to worry about, but instead the bleak financial state that is bound to ensue unless this spending problem is eradicated. 

TAGS: research, Spending, issues

blog comments powered by Disqus