Politics and Money

[Matthew251430]

Sorry FMTW. Not trying to put words in your mouth. Can you see how I came to that assumption though? Global warming has pretty much been given a label of being a liberal/progressive stance on what's happening with our climate. Conservative politians are almost united in being climate change deniers. So of course if the overwelming majority of scientists feel that global warming is real wouldn't that mean according to you that they lean towards doing liberal bidding and are liberals themselves? This thing imo is and should not be politicized. The only reason it is is because of the oil industry. It goes like this

Senario:
1.Climate change and global warming is real.
2.Stronger regulations are put into place to reduce carbon emissions which will affect the oil industry's bottom line.
3.Alternative energy projects and research goes full force ahead.
4.An alternative is found,established, and become mainstream resource for consumers.
5.Oil industry suffers as their commodity is no longer relevant on level it is. Oil industry is reduced to mom and pop shops over time or become the perverbial 8 track tape.
6.oil industry sees this and commits hundreds of billions of dollars to lobbying simply so that our politicians elected with their money will say there is no global warming.

Now that's a logical senario.

For people to say 97 percent of scientists agree with global warming because of an agenda they have or support other than the safety of humanity imo doesn't make sense. First off that's a lot of pay offs to scientists for and industry that is the mom and pop shop. Alternative energy backers are not even close to having that much power and resources.

So you got to ask yourself, who's more likely going to lie about this the politicians or the scientists?

Who has the most at stake?