The gov only funds global warming alarmist studies. Why doesn't the gov fund all studies on global warming ?? Global warming alarmism has enormous economic implications. Don't you think it prudent for the gov to fund research ensuring that the global warming is completely understood before doing economic damage ?? Don't you think that a thorough cost vs. benefit analysis should be required ??
Absolutely. Scientists are no different from prostitutes.The fossil fuel/ tobacco industry and the government pay the same currency, don't they?
Problem is that there aren't that many deniers and all surveys done show 91-100% of publishing climate scientists agree according to multiple studies and surveys. https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm Also I have never heard any convincing evidence for any alternative explanation for the warming we have seen. The biggest alternative, then sun has actually cooled in the last 70 years which almost all of the warming happened in. We know CO2 is an important greenhouse gas that traps heat and from calculations from heat and gas laws we found that raising it the way we have would raise the temperature in the way we have seen. When we exclude CO2 there isn't anything that could have caused this warming and estimates show flat temperature. When we factor in CO2 then you see the rise. In fact there is a lot of funding of climate denial and one of the few skeptics tried to conduct an objective study funded by Koch but instead actually confirmed humans were the cause. His name is Richard Muller and he even appeared in that global warming swindle documentary that deniers made previously. https://thinkprogress.org/bombshell...h-end-and-essentially-all-due-to-be07aeadc3de Exxon Mobile and Koch have given hundreds of millions to find climate denial research. Stop trying to say there is only bias in one direction.
It depends on the scientist I guess. They are just ordinary people who live in the same neighborhoods that everyone else live in.
Almost no scientists are saying that humans are not contributing to global warming. 97% of scientists say so - only 3% say that humans are causing most of the warming. But the earth was warming at practically the same rate which much less CO2 increase in the atmosphere. And in the time period after 1950 we have seen warming, cooling, and steady temperatures. If all the global warming is from CO2 increase then why have there been warming, cooling, and steady periods. And the sun has not cooled in the last 70 years - where does that come from ?? Richard Muller heads the Berkeley Earth project which is attempting to consolidate and validate global average temperature. He's hardly a denier as you call them. Where is all this funding by the Oil Industry ?? The Koch brothers ?? Get serious. Think Progress blames the Koch brothers for everything. Where have these hundreds of millions of dollars been spent ??
Thats pretty obviously explained. CO2 isn't the only factor. It appears to be the biggest long-term factor that has changed. But short-term factors can easily over-power a long-term factor over a short time period. For example the sun warms the earth from January to July. Over a couple weeks temperatures can actually decline because of short-term weather patterns. Yes we have seen short-term pauses but a long-term trend and that is what really matters here: This. At the very most you can argue that it has been flat. Now he is, but not a few years ago. He used to be a high profile denier. They have given 100 million since 1997 to climate denial. One study found 500 million in funding from just 2003 to 2010. https://phys.org/news/2013-12-koch-brothers-reveals-funders-climate.html https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/
Look at the gradient from 1910 to 1940 and the gradient from 1970 to 2010 - they are the same for much different rates of CO2 increase. And look at the cooling from 1940 to 1970 as CO2 steadily increased. How can anyone conclude that human CO2 emissions are responsible for most of the global warming ?? The reduction in solar cycles corresponds to the pause in global warming from the late 90's until today as shown by satellite measurements. And again almost no scientist denies that CO2 contributes to warming. Muller is and always has stated that. That's $5 million per year. How much has the gov spent - it's much much more. And what is climate denial ?? And what is climate change denial ??