Yes, they are the ones making money from this scam. They are the ones enacting inane laws because of this scam. They are reaping benefits from a theory that they will not even attempt to prove. They throw out innuendoes and outright fabrications then say, "The burden of proof is on you true scientists to prove us wrong. In the mean time, until you do, we will continue to scare people and tax the crap out of you."

Just look at the latest scare.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/20/4...

Now when 2016 gets here these low end of the scale will say that it wasn't peer reviewed and Bernstein wasn't a scientist. They have done this over and over but then lying, cheating and deceiving people is not against the law or all greenies and politicians would be in jail.

Who cares about models, or tweaking them. Global warming is happening

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...

And we are causing it

http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...

The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2013 and 2012.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Yes. Scientists HAVE proven their theories (which contrary to your lame endlessly repeated fiction here are not identical to crystal ball gazing) hundreds of times over during the history of massive climate science research that you

a) are willfully and totally ignorant of and/or

b) are too dimwitted to understand and/or

c) are incurably addicted to endlessly lying about.

If this TRUE answer is vaporized by your liar-denier buddies or anyone/thing else -like dozens of others of mine since your reincarnation- I will repost it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_...

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timel...

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/index...

http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/...

http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoi...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Revie...

http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...

U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record...

“Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems.”

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpine...

“Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/awards/NAS/

“The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes.

Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”

they do. this is what publishing in scientific journals is about. the 6 month interval is unrealistic.

Should global warming "scientists" prove their theories are correct by publishing their predictions at six month intervals for the next 50 years to see just how accurate the computer models are at prediction the future? This way we can determine how accurate the models are and where they need to be tweaked.