Quote:
Originally posted by Bingo@May 3 2005, 08:22 PM
The two that I've heard mentioned ...
1. Grants ... no money in the opposite view. Best way to keep the money coming in is to stay firmly on the global warming side.
2. The look ... how many scientists want to step out and be pro-pollution, a possible spin to someone that questions the current global warming science. Heck even in this string we've seen someone accuse them of being conservatives in pursuit of their own interests.
|
I find that reasoning more than a little suspect.
There should be a lot of money available from heavily polluting businesses for scientists who can prove that global warming is a myth.
I find it far easier to believe that somebody paid some scientists to try and prove global warming is a myth than the notion that a bunch of scientists are scared to be on the global warming is a myth bandwagon or that there is no funding for it.
And based on what I've heard over the years, the "global warming is a myth" camp is much smaller than the opposite.
Obviously we don't know for sure but I'm far more suspect of the myth group and I think it's only natural to be based on who benefits from the each viewpoint.