rprt – no, you miss what I'm saying, I don't think that the driver is pressure from the drug companies – its the very essence of research to identify a problem and solve it, scientists naturally focus their work on problems rather than "not a problem" – its entirely paved in good intentions.
As for the global industrial complex – have you seen how much money is going to be made by a certain large steel company closing their factory in the UK, opening another one in india with the same CO2 output, and then selling all the european carbon credits that they were gifted for the Teeside Chorus factory on the open market?
As for backing organisations to rubbish the existing science – you have to apply the level playing field to organisations like Greenpeace, a clearly biased multi million pound global organisation, who's jobs depend entirely on the level of funding they can attract to tell us how we're all doomed – and how many other fake charities and research organisations? most of which get money from the climate change research budget – would the people at CRU have jobs if climate change was not 'the biggest threat facing humanity'?
Its not deliberate, its entirely paved with good intentions, but theres certainly a significant risk of bias creeping in! Don't forget, that anyone who doubts the science is told that the science is settled, theres an overwhelming consensus, look at the CRU emails, trying to rubbish and suppress papers and scientists that don't agree, and limit access to the raw data to people who are 'on message' – its a self licking ice cream cone, the science perpetuates itself – follow the money!
