What's the Motive?

I've noticed after following this forum for a little while that many who post here are critics of human caused global warming. I was under the impression that there was a scientific consensus on this issue.

I can see the possible motives of opponents, such as protecting fossil fuel and related industries. However, I'm having trouble figuring out what you guys think the underlying motives of the proponents are.

I will admit, this isn't an issue I follow very closely so I'm not trying to start anything here, just looking for some information.

Darin

Darin Joeckel said:

I've noticed after following this forum for a little while that many who post here are critics of human caused global warming. I was under the impression that there was a scientific consensus on this issue.

Darin

There IS a scientific consensus on the issue, that GW is human-caused. Every major scientific organization concerned with this issue recognizes human-caused climate change. However, it has become a political issue as well, so we are seeing politically motivated arguments here against the science. There is a minority of actual climate scientists who do not accept human-caused GW, but their voices are magnified and trumpeted by the politicos.

Where does your impression that there is a scientific concensus come from? What was the source?

Try to get funding for research for the contrary hypothesis, and you will find your answer. Follow the money.

What was the motive in the 1970's, when the 'consensus' among climatologists was that earth was experiencing unstoppable global cooling due to soot from carbon emissions that was going to lead to mass famine, mass extinctions, and the next ice age by, ummmm, now?

Do we understand people yet?