If you’re going to play follow-the-money, first ask this: Where is more money at stake–in the government funding of climate science or in the industries who believe (rightly or wrongly) that steps taken to attempt to alleviate global warming will affect their bottom line?
What, exactly, do you think the consensus is? What happens when one scientist is correct and others verify that the one scientist is correct? Would you describe the result as a “consensus”?
I am not, as I’ve said above, a climate scientist, and I’m also for the record not a geologist. My understanding of plate tectonics is pretty basic. But it seems to me that physics suggests that changes in weight on a continental plate by, for example, massive shifts from solid to liquid water could result in changes to how that plate is aligned–i.e., earthquakes. I don’t know if that’s what you’re talking about or not, but it doesn’t sound completely far-fetched to me.
