Why would they want to destroy their entire field of study like that? The fear mongering related to man made global warming is the only reason their field is relevant at all to begin with. How long would "big business" fund them if man made global warming was debunked? a few years maybe? Possibly even a decade after which their field would be essentially dead.
You just said they were motivated by profit. Why are they consciously choosing a less profitable outcome?
No, you misunderstand not personal profit, funding. They want funding for their research, which they wouldn't get if not for the fear surrounding the idea of man made global warming. That's what put climate science on the map, that's what keeps the funding flowing. If it was debunked, it would all but kill the field and they'd have to go back to begging for scraps when it comes to trying to find funding for their research.
And this theory seems more plausible to you than giant energy companies "funding" a small minority of scientists to deny man made global warming?
The theory that they would exaggerate results in order to keep their field well funded? Yeah, that's more plausible than the theory that the 0.3% of greenhouse gasses added by man will destroy all life on the planet.
Wow, I'm amazed at your contempt for the integrity of scientists. Of course there will always be liars, fakes in the field of scientists, like any other field, but from what I see, many of them go into the field because they love the science. Of course they need funding, but to the scale of fraud you are suggesting? Wow. Also, you are severely underestimating the fame that other scientists could get if they can take down the climate change theory. If it were indeed a massive hoax/conspiracy, there would've been countless scientists trying to make a name for themselves by conclusively proving anthromorphic climate change doesn't exist. The media would've seized upon it, just like they did with that one email from East Anglia. So you think that a bunch of scientists managed to fool the entire media, the UN, the entire world, and even the private sector, into believing climate change is real? And only a handful of people like you have discovered this conspiracy?
The strawman is strong in you. No reputable scientist would say that climate change would "destroy all life". The greatest extinction events in world history have never been able to "destroy all life". Climate change is not an extinction level event, not even close. Climate change will displace populations, cost significant amounts of money, destroy many ecosystems and has the ability to start more wars over natural resources.
You appear to be completely misunderstanding the scientist's predictions. I haven't heard a single report by a reputable scientist claiming that climate change will "destroy all life on the planet." However, there are plenty of them who talk about rising sea levels displacing coastal dwellers over the next century or so. Why do you have to be so hyperbolic to try and make a point?
No one said that climate change wasn't "real", obviously the climate is changing....it's always changing. That's why they get away with it. They are attributing the natural climate change to human activities as a scare tactic, and that's how they've managed to make climate science relevant. Tell me someone who wants to dedicate their life to a field only to destroy it? You might think that they are beyond acting in their own rational self interest, but I don't. They are only human after all.
It's just shere coincidence that the significant majority of your " thruth seekers" happen to profit off of an industry that would be severely hampered if man assisted climate change is real.
I was merely making fun of the hyperbolic statements made by the other side of the argument. Don't pretend they don't exist, you'd see them if you just read this thread. How about
Is that going to be the next wording of it? First "Man made global warming" then "Man made climate change" then "Man assisted climate change"? All you have to do is follow the money on this, where was climate science funding before global cooling/global warming scare tactics? Where would climate science funding be without man made global warming? All scientists have to do is throw in a line about a possible link between man's activities or potential contributions (no matter how minute) to their hard science data reports and voila, the funding continues. Without that link, no one cares and they are back begging for funding. The idea that humans can control the temperature of the earth either to warm it or cool it is laughable honestly. The Earth is going to do what the earth is going to do and our impact isn't that large one way or the other.
You said the THEORY dicdates that climate change will end all life. Last time I checked theories are a result of the scientific method which is often done by scientists. Are any of the people you quoted scientists more speceficially scientists who advanced the theory of man assisted climate change? You are attempting to discredit the theory using uninformed non scientists as your sources. If you want to discredit the work of scientists who believe in man assisted climate change use their peer reviewed work specifically. Give us some concrete quantitative objective data that shows that climatologists skewed data in order to perpetuate the myth thst man has something to do with climate change otherwise all you are doing is outlandish speculation.
How about you actually use the predictions of the climate scientists rather than arguing against straw men?
