But aren't those things looked down upon? Everyone hates governemnt bureacracy, most people think that action on global warming will bring economic disaster, governments do not want to discuss raising taxes and why would they want to further regulate industry and deter economic activity.
Well, people look down on government growth and bureacracy unless it is something they want. If everyone hates government growth and government bureacracy, why is the government allowed to grow and increase in scope?
I liken it to Britney Spears. Everyone seems to hate her, and yet she sold millions of records.
The reason why I don't buy it is because I personally know a number of climatologists quite well and I've talked with them about their research and funding and there has been no persuasion or interference with their work.
It may be more subtle than explicit persuasion or interference. Just like pavlov's dogs who knew that a ringing bell meant food.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Thisis such a lame arguement. Science is not dependant on who the funding comes from. If it's bad science argue the science. If it's not bad science who cares where the funding comes from. Also, do you equally question who the funding comes from for scientists who are on the climate change is nearly 100% man made? Do you question why none of these scientists come out proposing humans adapt as a strategy? Or did these scientists basically have a self-interested strategy defined before looking at the facts?
It's not that the editorials coming out of the Exxon funded thinktanks are bad science.(farfromglorified posted another example) They simply are not science altogether.
In the next few months the panel on climate change plans to issue some conclusions on what can be done. Adapting to a process that has no habitable endpoint is inadequate.
As for some of the other points comparing profit to grants. Profit goes into your bank account. I suppose grants can provide job security. But it takes one hell of a conspiracy theorist to buy climate change as a hoax to keep PhDs employed.
if economic stipulations are the only reason the US hasn't gotten involved in saving the planet our priorities sure are fucked up...
It is a classic tragedy of the commons problem. The economic interests of a few are placed above the common good of a clean stable atmosphere. It happens because the benefits of exploitation are collected by individuals, while the costs of such exploitation are shared by everyone. With no effective means of imposing the true costs of exploitation on individuals the natural consequence is over exploitation of the resource.
Comments
Well, people look down on government growth and bureacracy unless it is something they want. If everyone hates government growth and government bureacracy, why is the government allowed to grow and increase in scope?
I liken it to Britney Spears. Everyone seems to hate her, and yet she sold millions of records.
It may be more subtle than explicit persuasion or interference. Just like pavlov's dogs who knew that a ringing bell meant food.
It's not that the editorials coming out of the Exxon funded thinktanks are bad science.(farfromglorified posted another example) They simply are not science altogether.
In the next few months the panel on climate change plans to issue some conclusions on what can be done. Adapting to a process that has no habitable endpoint is inadequate.
As for some of the other points comparing profit to grants. Profit goes into your bank account. I suppose grants can provide job security. But it takes one hell of a conspiracy theorist to buy climate change as a hoax to keep PhDs employed.
It is a classic tragedy of the commons problem. The economic interests of a few are placed above the common good of a clean stable atmosphere. It happens because the benefits of exploitation are collected by individuals, while the costs of such exploitation are shared by everyone. With no effective means of imposing the true costs of exploitation on individuals the natural consequence is over exploitation of the resource.