The above post is by by an imposter trying ever so hard to be clever
The above post is by by an imposter trying ever so hard to be clever
I think your handle is quite appropriate. Climate scientists are not politicians, nor are politicians climate scientists. Climate scientists are not trying to force anything on you. They're simply saying these are the facts and this is what we predict based on those facts. That you don't understand this again shows you have no business in this discussion. I mean really? Really? You think climate scientists are trying to force you into certain behavior? And you think I'm the nutjob.
You go on to say the Green Movement is about money... Yes, of course, a movement about reducing spending and consumerism is about money. You must have really thought this through. And if you think climate scientists have to make stuff up in order to keep their jobs, you know nothing about scientific research. Funding can be hard to get, but there is all kinds of virtually meaningless research out there that is getting funded. No one lies about their research to get funded, and those who do are quickly weeded out. It's a one-strike system. If it can be shown you're lying about anything, no matter how small, you're banished from the scientific community (that includes way more than just climate science), and every paper that is ever published is scrutinized for error. There is a reason nearly every person who studies climate agrees it has an anthropogenic component and Science and Nature etc have not dismissed their findings. I would be interested to know your credentials and where you get your info from.
And you missed my point entirely about whether or not the anthropogenicity of climate change is important or not. Take a step outside the bubble of climate change specifically and look at the issues I brought up.
Anyway, thank you for your manners and civility. Yes, I strongly disagree with you, but I can appreciate the way in which you argued your points. Best to you too.