[katana]

Those are anything but stupid questions. But the answer to them can be summed up in two words, the two constants in all of human history ... Money and Power. This has nothing to do with science, the climate, or the environment. It’s money taken from the advanced and productive and sent to the pockets of third world thug chieftains, with Al Gore and his ilk managing the transfer and taking their cut. And the power to coerce and control humanity at the most basic level of survival.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

Yes, but the other contributor to this field is the amount of grant money and academic ‘success’ that comes with tying ones career to a hot topic that is being backed by the political establishment. The first author is a graduate student, probably very hard working nice kid, just trying to qualify for a Ph.D. and have a life and career. It's fine to do computer modeling and add to the cumulative scientific data. However, it's up to the scientific community to stick to the facts, acknowledge the limitations of computer modeling and specific studies, and to above all be very honest with the data - including making all raw data available.

Making raw data available is slowly becoming a requirement in the biological sciences, in part a response to overstatement of data, outright fraud, and over interpretation of findings. Scientists have a responsibility to question their own results, and to be committed to finding the truth - wherever it leads. One problem with this is that if the truth runs contrary to the ‘desired’ truth, it will be difficult to publish, and it could end your career.