[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by =CfC= Father Ted

Pretty much plus one to this. I used to work in government-funded research in the UK. People who do this sort of stuff aren't in it for the money. They're not into trying to scam the general public out of money to fund their lifestyles. If they do want more money, it's to fund their actual research. They're driven by a desire to find stuff out, and also to earn the respect of their peers.

To make a slightly tortured analogy, they're like people who fly online and insist it's full switch - they want other people to say "That guy's good!". So there are egos involved. This means, as Camber pointed out, that the scientific consensus is not normally arrived at though some chummy agreement.

Before anyone jumps on this post, I'm not claiming that these people do their stuff for free, or that they'd turn down the chance to get paid like Premiership footballers. But I bet if they did get paid that much, they'd use a good chunk of the money to buy better scientific gear, rather than two Lamborghinis.

Success for them is not about earning more and more dosh.

On the other side of the fence, to my mind, you have the petro-chemical industry. I think we can agree that they do measure success in terms of profits. Why could they possibly opposed to the idea that the burning of fossil fuels is something that we should be curtailing?

Of these two sides, which is the more powerful, in terms of shaping world economy and politics? A bunch of people who just want to prove that they're right to their own small community, or a bunch of people who can convince nations to go to war in their interests?

If there is a conspiracy involved in proving the validity of the theory of man-made climate change, I know who I think is behind it.

oh but of course.

then there's the tales of patents for various renewable or non-fossil fuel driven systems being bought up by petro-chemical companies, stock piled to ensure the company survives beyond stocks and supply of said fossil fuels. i mean it's a conspiracy theory, but the depressing thing is that it is entirely credible. why hurt their market share before they have to, right?