elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Yeah, well, we've been here before. The consensus for AGW among the best and brightest--and best-credentialed--scientists continues to grow and now approaches near unanimity, while the dwindling opposition gets angrier and angrier and more and more strident by the minute. How do you explain this? Why in your opinion are mainstream scientists so resistant to what you regard as the truth? Are you sure you're not just being stubborn at this point?
And trillions, surely, not just a "few billions". . ..
Dr. Richard Lindzen described what's going on in climate science several years ago, and I share his view. By definition, 'climate scientists' are not mainstream scientists at all. For one thing they don't acknowledge that science requires predictions to be verified against real world data obtained by independent scientists (not just their academic buddies). We recall that Einstein said that it would take only one experiment to prove his theory wrong; AGW theory (as expressed above) has been proven wrong repeatedly. But research funding comes from politicians, and politicians aren't scientists (with exceptions), and the show goes on.
Some time back, at your request, I posted a very fine scientific analysis, which I officially endorsed, concerning what turned out to be IPCC's non-existent "tropical hot spot." Such materials are ignored by climate scientists. That community is completely insular.
Ed