rberq wrote: much of the respectable world scientific community HAS bought into the fact of global warming. Are they all naive dupes?
AFAIK their isn't much disagreement the world has warmed over the last few decades. One survey I'm aware of sent out to 10K scientists that would have expertise in this field with 3K responding asked something simple like "Do you think the globe has warmed significantly?" I believe something like 85% responded yes, the problem with this question is "significant" is not quantified. There is also other issues associated with this poll, the summary states IP's were blocked to prevent duplicate votes. That's more likely to prevent others from voting than anything as large universities and buildings might share same IP. The other problem is the respondents themselves, for example if you sent out a survey about abortion my guess would be you would have overwhelming response from the pro life crowd.
The argument starts is if it's man made and how much. This issue is political and if you don't think politics plays a huge role in science you're being naive. We have an emphasis on the negative aided and abetted by main stream media and never hear a peep about anything positive. If you listened to just the news you'd think there is very little controversy over this and the "science is settled"... science is never settled. Now everything is caused by global warming, 10 years ago a few were predicting no more snow in England. They got buried this year and had very cold weather. This of course was caused by Global Warming because abnormal cold and snow is not supposed to happen as if England never had cold and snowy weather before. Abnormal cold= AGW, Abnormal warm = AGW, extreme weather = AGW...... there was even a few proposing the earthquake in Haiti was caused by AGW.
At this point, the way to really make a scientific reputation would be to DISPROVE that warming is taking place at an unprecedented pace.
There's a lot of research out there that shows that but they get shunned as "skeptics", have it rejected because of politics in the scientific community, get called "big oil" lackeys etc.... There certainly isn't any incentive to stick your neck out into this arena. Just like proving it, disproving it is herculean task.