Slashdot

Follow the money and the motivation. Certain people make tons of money off the status quo, and thus have tons of money to throw around to influence the debate and the science.

This alone isn't reason to refuse acceptance of any evidence, theories or deny any debate or conversation on the matter. The fact is there will always be another side to every argument and not everyone is out to get you even if they seem to be siding with your mortal enemies.

Scientists aren't rich, the liberals you think are trying to scam you aren't rich, and none of them have anything to gain by advancing the idea of global climate change.

Actually, it doesn't have to be about money. Political ideology is in and of itself just as powerful as religious dogma and as valuable to some as money. I have heard of people dieing for the causes they believe in and they won't collect money or power when they are dead. At the time global warming was first being pushed, there were groups attempting to get the US and other countries to use their influence to forgive the third world debt and it disappeared when the UN came out with the Kyoto accords.

Now if we follow the money and watch the debate, we can quickly see the an unterior agenda on the political side. We have groups sponsored by the UN which BTW was behind part of the forgive the third world debt push who's only goal was to find human causes for global warming. Now this isn't saying that it doesn't exist or that it isn't happening. But it is saying that there is political biases surounding the entire debate including anything coming from the IPCC. If somehow you have been blinded by that bias, I am sorry but you are no longer an objective observer in the debate. That is fine but don't let your prejudices sequester other ideas that might be more right or more wrong. If there is a problem, we won't get to the root causes of it and we will most assuredly miss the solutions. Dismissing dissent as wackos solely because they don't agree with you won't help you case. Before you know it, everyone but you will be a wacko.

The people you support, the rich and powerful who would stand to lose the most from any changes to the global economy, they are the ones running a scam.

Firs of all, what makes you think I support anyone in this? Is it because I called you out on your religiously fanaticism over the subject? I am not with you so I must be against you? And if I am against you I must be siding with your enemy? You have to be careful in your clumsy assumptions. right now it is you looking like the wacko more then the guy who suggested global warming might get a face lift.

Why are falling for such an obvious ploy?

And I ask you the same thing. I am willing to listen to the parts of the discusion that make sense. I am willing to listen to the answers that will have a meaningful effect. What I am not willing to do is follow the faith blindly and without questioning the one thing that sticks in my side, why does every question need to be silences as soon as possible? And BTW, there are far more enterprising ways of solving the problem is the human use of fossil fuels are the actual problem other then limiting what developed countries can do in the hope of propping up under developed countries. If dissent is such a scam, then why are these other solutions purposely buried in favor of carbon credits and exploiting third world countries? It would seem to be the scam, at least on the solutions side is what you are supporting. Surely in this modern day and age we can find ways of figuring out how to counter the effects of AGW without transferring wealth or putting severe economic barriers up. I am a simple idiot and I can think of several ways.

I really doubt you are in the 'rich and powerful' category, and you thus have little to lose if we do change the global economy.

Your righ