Tipp blue
If I agreed with you, we’d both be wrong.
If your funding is reliant upon man made climate change, then you'll find proof of it to keep your funding... it's easy for you to say big oil paid for that research of course it's going to come to that conclusion and then dismiss it as snake oil science, how come you are so unwilling to say the same about government funded research? Governments are making stacks of money, there's now millions of jobs world wide depending on climate changes being man made, I guess these are legit scientists they'd have to be to get funded by government not like those charlatans who get their funding from big oil.You know, @Tipp blue made a great point in another thread. Did you know these scientists get paid money for their research? Yeah, that's right. They get paid. These super-rich scientists would have us believe that dumping 35 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere is bad for you. I feel sorry for the not-for-profit oil industry having to contend with science's financial clout, it's like Torquay versus Manchester City.
Former NOAA Scientist Confirms Colleagues Manipulated Climate Records
science.house.gov
A scientist manipulated climate data. Conservative media celebrated.
The journal Nature rebuked researcher Patrick Brown for claiming that prestigious publications only accept articles that exaggerate the effects of climate
www.eenews.net
World leaders duped by manipulated global warming data
The Mail on Sunday today reveals evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming.
www.dailymail.co.uk