This is another poor analogy. If you don't believe there are funded investigators who toe "the anthropogenic global warming" line then you are naive. There have been various dire prognostications that were put forth that haven't panned out. Without domain expertise, it is impossible to judge the actual credibility of various reports. It is like me trying to judge the credibility of a clinical trial for a new drug. I simply don't have the expertise to understand the issues of a drug trial.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eweissenbach
It is true we don't know the extent of the problem. It seems like every credible report that comes out shows it to be worse than earlier thought. This reminds me of the cigarette companies arguing many years ago that smoking and cancer were not linked. They also bought a few politicians and "scientists" to support their argument but didn't have the money that the petroleum and coal industry and companies like Koch Industries to buy enough to really influence many people or buy enough politicians.
|