Does this thread try to make the assumption that if you accept grant money from a private corporation, that your findings automatically become incorrect and that they only came to that conclusion because of the source of the funds?
That's a laughable point. Science is science, you can't fake it. Either the research is flawed, in which case another scientist should be able to point out that flaw, or is this just a puff piece designed to warm the cockles of progressives everywhere with the flame of guilt by association?
If you want to discredit the science, then find the errors in the science.
Some errors I have noted myself over the years.
Why do they use a tiny tiny fraction of earth climate to figure an average Temperature?
Why only 1951-1980?
Are they saying that this tiny tiny tiny slice of Earth climate over the previous 4 billion years is properly representative?
I remember the 70's headlines that we were looking at another ice age due to all the cooling. Hmm the 70's cool temps would tend to exasperate any "temperature mean" to the low scale when used. That would tend to make any means on the higher side look even worse.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
Using 30 years as being representative of the other 3,999,999,970 years just doesn't seem quite right.
Why are most of the temperature reading stations in cities?
http://www.surfacestations.org/
Don't cities trap heat within their buildings and paved streets that make it warmer? Its called the heat island effect.
http://www.epa.gov/heatisland/
Wow up to a 12C difference between a city and the surrounding rural land. What part of USA is city?
http://www.newgeography.com/content/001689-how-much-world-covered-cities
Wow, less than 2.7%.
And most of these stations have a 2C error rate.
So if most of your measurement devices are in or near cities, and cities create there own heat which can be significantly warmer than the other 97% of the earth. Why are we relying on them?
Find the flaws in the science, don't base your opinion on where the money comes from, base it on what evidence you have that shows flaws in the science.
I have nothing against sustainable living and manufacturing, in fact I am probably the ONLY person here who ACTIVELY practices what so many preach. I have a large Photovoltaic array (Solar panels) that gives me all the power I need and some for you too. So yeah, I got a high horse.
Making carbon dioxide criminal makes life criminal. You breathe that shit out, if you think its contributing to global warming, then stop breathing. Good luck with that you polluter.
Why do people ignore the one thing that has more effect on our climate than anything else BY FAR. The Sun.
Why do people dismiss the sun as having any effect, but claim cow farts do?
