Quote:
Originally Posted by MuseChaser
Citation? Not even 97% of the scientist I know personally fit that description, and I've spent my entire adult life employed in public through post-graduate academia.
|
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.the...fclimatechange
It really doesn’t matter if it is 97% or 90% or 75%. It isn’t 50% or 25%. Even if it isn’t anthropomorphic, scientists are still in agreement that it is alarming. That consensus is extremely high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuseChaser
That was the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Seriously....it caused me to enjoy nasal coffee. Scientists are no more or less susceptible to outside biases than any other profession. I dare say, since quite a bit of (the bulk of?) the funding of their research comes from government grants and gifts from corportations with definite vested interests in ..shall we say...desired findings.... that perhaps research scientists may be bit MORE susceptible to outside pressures. You were kidding, right? Please tell me you were kidding....please.
|
The data is published. The studies are peer reviewed and critiqued for errors in their methodology, statistics and analysis. Scientists intentionally are vague and humble knowing their work and their credibility are easily tarnished or refuted by future studies. While scientists are paid and are sponsored and do receive grants, you seem to be acting as if scientists have deceitful alternative motives in some global conspiracy theory to move money from fossil fuel giants to new green energy sectors. Have you read studies or been to a scientific conference before? It is hard for anyone to read these articles or go to one of these events and not think scientists are some of the most humble people out there.
Scientists are driven to study the world or develop applications for problems. They aren’t in the business of fabricating problems for the deep state like some people believe.