3. These scientists, along with their inferences from thousands of peer-reviewed accounts of field and laboratory studies, are all simply wrong.
4. The consensus conclusion of these scientists is correct: global warming is real and homo sapiens have caused it.
A Hoax? Bribery? Scientific Error? Our Response:
Is climate change a hoax?
If so, then it is a "hoax" deliberately and collectively perpetrated by thousands of active climate scientists from dozens of countries throughout the world. It is a "hoax" endorsed by virtually every national and international scientific organization, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Academy of Sciences. In other words, this "hoax" amounts to an international conspiracy.
What possible motive could unite so many individuals and nations from so many differing cultures, traditions, religions and national interests -- a motive so compelling that it leads them all to participate in a colossal fraud? None that I can imagine, save perhaps personal financial gain, which we will deal with next.
There is, however, another common motive which might lead all these climate scientists to the consensus that global climate change is real and largely of human origin: Scientific integrity.
That integrity is achieved through by strict adherence to scientific method and rigorous peer review prior to publication. Conversely, a violation of this integrity, for example by presenting non-replicable "cooked" evidence or purchased conclusions, can end a scientific career.
Have climate scientists been "bought off" by funding agencies?
If you wish to trade in your scientific reputation for cash, don't look to the United Nations, the United States, or other governments for that payoff. You will do far better if you solicit the Koch brothers, or Exxon-Mobil, or Peabody Coal. To be sure, a few scientists have done just that, but not enough to make a dent in that roster of climate scientists who have joined the consensus.
But bribing thousands of scientists around the world to affirm a conclusion that they all know to be false? What agency could conceivably be behind this conspiracy? National governments that are members of the United Nations? But why would any national government, much less all governments, prefer a finding of climate change to that of a steady-state climate?
And what independent evidence exists of this colossal bribery? If there were any, you can be sure that it would have been trumpeted by the corporate media. Of these thousands of allegedly corrupt scientists, have any of them "fessed up" to their crimes? None that I know of. If they had, we would know of it, believe me.
In one noteworthy case, Stanford climatologist Richard Muller, on record as a "climate change skeptic," accepted a grant from the Koch brothers to critically examine the validity of the scientific consensus. Muller's conclusion: he was wrong and the consensus was right. Anthropogenic climate change is very real.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
1
