Gunman At DC Pizza Parlor Was 'Investigating' Right-Wing Conspiracy 'Pizzagate' Lie

[hollodero]

(12-05-2016, 09:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: None of this is true at all.

Scientists get research funds to do research.  They do not get paid to favor one side or the other unless they are working for private companies like the oil and gas industry.  

Same with finding cancer causing agents.  There are thousands of studies done each year on all sorts of substances o see if they can be approved for use by the general public.  Scientists get paid the same if they find carcinogens or not.  If what you claimed was true then there would not have been any new medications approved ever because they would all be labeled as causing cancer.

The only climate change scientists with financial motives are the ones hired by the oil and gas industry.  Any government measures to surb global warming would actually HURT the economy.  So they have no financial motive to support global warming.

I don't know about the US, but in the scientific world here there always is some pressure to produce some kind of result that can be published. Which from time to time leads to some study with titles and claims with the word "possible" added that somehow disguise the fact that there's nothing real substantial to see.
A scientist whose research doesn't prove or show anything gets a harder time to recieve fundings the next year, and fundings are needed and money's often tight.

Not that I would say climate change is sensationalism on the part of the scientists, not by a long shot, but when someone claims "well, scientists need to have results" in order to be able to carry on, it's tough to say there's no truth to that at all. The point is not completely moot (although it in no way indicates that climate change is unproven or "looney").