Greatly improved computer models began to suggest how such jumps could happen for example through a change in the circulation of ocean currents. Experts predicted droughts, storms, rising sea levels, and other disasters. A few politicians began to suspect there might be a public issue here. However, the modelers had to make many arbitrary assumptions about clouds and the like, and reputable scientists disputed the reliability of the results. Others pointed out how little was known about the way living ecosystems interact with climate and the atmosphere. They argued, for example, over the effects of agriculture and deforestation in adding or subtracting carbon dioxide from the air. One thing the scientists agreed on was the need for a more coherent research program. But the research remained disorganized, and funding grew only in irregular surges. The effort was dispersed among many different scientific fields, each with something different to say about climate change.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laugh out loud funny!
The crisis may change, but the solution is always the same - MO OF YO MONEY!
Honestly, when have these academic clowns been right about ANYTHING?
"population bomb"
"Abenomics"
"the stimulus"
"Obamacare" (remember how they promised to 'fix' health care??)
"global cooling"
"global warming"
Only someone with a vested interest in this fearmongering would believe this bullshit.
face)(*^%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Laugh out loud funny!
The crisis may change, but the solution is always the same - MO OF YO MONEY!
Honestly, when have these academic clowns been right about ANYTHING?
"population bomb"
"Abenomics"
"the stimulus"
"Obamacare" (remember how they promised to 'fix' health care??)
"global cooling"
"global warming"
Only someone with a vested interest in this fearmongering would believe this bullshit.
face)(*^%
