Just curious - why are those with perceived conflicts of interest on
the 'anti-warming' side seen as self-serving, while those on the
'pro-warming' side are given a pass? All scientists get funding from
somewhere and, as such, all have the opportunity to be self-serving.
How is it that the only ones deemed to be honest on this issue are
those who agree with Al Gore?

On Jan 25, 10:00 am, Paul M. Eldridge
wrote:
I presume this is the same Richard Lindzen who has testified on behalf
of the Western Fuels Association, a consortium of coal miners and
coal-fired utilities and OPEC, right?

See:http://www.desmogblog.com/comment/reply/417

Cheers,
Paul