If it’s true that scientists (and Al Gore) are biasing their arguments so that they can reap research grants and carbon-trading futures, then it must be true that conflicts of interest play a far larger role on the other side, which includes oil, coal, electric power, energy intensive industries and other huge special interests. The logical disconnect that faults scientists for conflicts of interest but unquestioningly accepts the arguments of oil barons, lobbyists and partisan polemicists is just puzzling.

Someone please help me… what does a Liberal or a Socialist gain from arguing for alternatives to fossil fuels? Please identify who these interests are who stand to make tons of money by fighting with the mega-rich and powerful oil companies.

In truth, the tree huggers may be promoting bad science, I don’t know. I do know, however, the following is true: not all Republicans are opposed to wind and solar power exploration (see T. Boone Pickens) but all those who oppose wind and solar power seem to vote Republican. To these troglodytes I say, fight your fight based on the science…leave the paranoid political theories at home.