[papertyger]

...real scientists who are not out to make bucks off of GW grants or selling carbon offsets...

BINGO!

Now tell us how these particular experts fit into the "make a buck" catagory, or admit your "analogy" was crap.

[TXnMA]

I was responding to your claim that those who don't kowtow to some "consensus of experts" are "truly myopic or duplicitous", etc.

"Furthermore, when multiple experts agree, only the truly myopic or duplicitous breezily dismiss their testimony. "

Your recourse to "consensus" of a few "experts" is bogus -- and is exactly what the AGW alarmists tried to cram down our throats.

AND, you ain't gonna get away with steering the discussion off course -- as you just attempted to do:

"Now tell us how these particular experts fit into the "make a buck" catagory, or admit your "analogy" was crap."

I was addressing your "consensus" claim. I never addressed the "missile" "experts" motivation at all.

Want to see "duplicitous"? Look in the mirror!