Do you find it ironic that the BEST project's study on climate change was funded by the Charles G. Koch....?

That's the great thing about the truth: it doesn't matter who pays for it, it's consistent.

This study was intended to address the few real issues educated climate-deniers had: location bias in monitoring stations, failure to account for cyclical effects, etc.

As it turns out, they did make a little bit of a difference: the other 5 studies measuring the exact same thing underestimated the warming trend. Ruh roh.

Koch Industries is evil previous degree. (although Monsanto nonetheless beats them on my record of worst firms on the earth.) the subject is Cap & commerce. it style of feels to be the sole answer being provided up and it is the incorrect one. it is going to easily be an inconvenience to businesses like Koch and that they'll use it to their benefit by using procuring up all the smaller businesses' carbon credit, marginalizing opposition, bribing extreme-up politicians and experts, and then passing that extra overhead on all the way down to the buyer. The pollution will nonetheless be there and we would be those paying the fee. The "deniers" are the way they are because of the fact they are rabidly against various those defective legislations. in the experience that your element can grant up extra advantageous suggestions, perhaps their element will give up being so anti-environment.

What's even more ironic, the study found evidence of climate change.

The biggest surprise is that this guy had the nuts to tell the truth, rather than keep cashing his paychecks, for kissing Koch.

global warming is not man made, no matter who is paying for it.

I find it ironic all other climate change studies are funded by government programs which stand to benefit most from climate change taxes and regulations.

And we all know everyone getting government funding votes for democrats.

Doesn't say anything about it being man made, now does it? Nobody denies the planet is going through a warming period (which it's done before). the debate is over whether it's man made or not.

Read it again. Still not finding where it says it's MAN MADE. Oh well, believe what you want.

But, of course, when somebody who believes in the scam does a test you have no problem with it. Hypocrite much?

The "best" would be a scientist, not a businessman. FAIL

Snow is on the way this evening where I live. Thanks for reminding me.