Bart:
<b>Re: politically-funded climate science unsurprisingly producing answers favorable to political expansionism</b>
<i>I’ve addressed the “almost all peddle alarmism” by pointing out that simply very few government funded scientists of any stripe are activists. </i>
"Pointed out", eh? Yet the obvious fact is they <b>do</i> peddle alarmism. 97% of them, you yourself say elsewhere. That their activism doesn't extend to affairs beyond their work, changes nothing - you don't need to carry placards and shout loudly to be an activist-scientist, you can content yourself with merely hiding data, hiding the decline, circumventing peer-review, etc. Or effectively collaborate with other activist-scientists engaged in such professional misconduct, by producing a pristine and deafening silence.
And you steer clear of the larger point that the <i>state</i> funding committees will naturally in the first place prefer and select people and projects they feel will most benefit the <i>state</i> . So what you end up have is a <i>confluence of vested interests</i>, ie minimal objectivity.
↧