This false quote: "Geoengineering is not a moral hazard; it's more like free-riding on our Grandkids" - was attributed to David Keith in the references for "What in the World Are They Spraying". Find the Original Source In this case the original source is a Royal Society conference that David Keith participated in, called "Geoengineering the climate - Science, governance and uncertainty". September 2009. The actual original quote is: "And by the way, it's not really a moral hazard, it's more like free riding on our grandkids." Context. David Keith was giving a talk that he's given many times before. He's discussing the implications of climate change. He's very much in favor of being very careful about geoengineering and tends towards not doing it if possible. In this version of the talk, the context around the quote is: Watch the video. He does not mention "moral hazard" there, so what is he referring to by "it". I don't have the rest of that talk, so we have to go to other versions of the talk. Particular the one at TED The meaning of terms. The conspiracy theorists are able to use this quote because hardly anyone understands what Keith means by "Moral Hazard". Keith himself confuses things by using the world "moral" in it's more usual sense earlier in the TED talk. "Moral Hazard" is a term from economics. It occurs when a party insulated from risk behaves differently than it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk. Here (in the TED talk, above, and hence presumably in the quoted talk), the "moral hazard" problem is that of doing nothing about because you think that geoengineering will fix it in the future. "Free-riding" is also a term from economics, but this time a more familiar one. A free-rider is someone who uses some resource without paying for it. The classic example being someone who rides a bus without paying the fare. This indirectly increases the costs on other passengers who DO pay for the bus. The meaning of the quote Once you know what he's talking about, it's quite straightforward. He's making a slightly subtle distinction between two economic terms to emphasis that by not addressing the questions around global climate change now, it's not just a "moral hazard", where people are being less careful now because they think the problem will be fixed later. It's really more serious that that. It's deferring a major problem to future generations. It's free-riding on our grandchildren. Ask the source what they meant I emailed David Keith, asking for clarification, here's his reply: So pretty much as I suggested, and clearly the exact opposite of how Michael Murphy tried to spin it. Single Sentence Debunking Keith is talking about the dangers of doing nothing about climate change, and how it might force our grandchildren to perform risky geoengineering later if we don't start trying to fix the problems of climate change soon.