"Well, that seems to be how (junk) science is determining that man is causing global warming. /sarcasm off"
hmmm, what your post says is that you agree that man causes global warming, yet I suspect your intention was to imply otherwise... sorry for the confusion, could you please clarify?
I apologize if I failed to clearly express my feelings on junk science in general and global warming alarmists in particular. Let me try again, without the confusing sarcasm....
Members of the scientific community that espouse the idea that mankind is the chief cause of global warming are either ignorant of or choose to ignore the overwhelming evidence that the earth has a regular temperature cycle, and human influence on it is so insignificant as to be almost too small to measure. For the most part, they are either after funding for their pet research projects, notoriety in the scientific community, or both. Add in the media's love of a sensational story that arouses interest in their target audience and you get an activism machine geared to feed on public opinion. The more the junk scientists spoon feed their tripe to the public through the media, the more attention and credibility they get.
Thus my sarcastic comment regarding junk science being a democratic process. Let me know if you are still unclear, and I'll try to break it down even more.