" if any scientist points out a flaw in the consensus they are attacked as being a denier". ..... any scientist that conducts research the uses proper scientific method producing results/observations that disproves the link between FFs and historically rapid increasing temperatures would likely be awarded a Nobel and lauded across the planet. but of course the 'consensus' your refer to, as I've told you several times, is the results of thousands of scientific studies pointing to the same conclusion. not, of course, referring to opinion.
It’s important to remember that scientists always focus on the evidence, not on opinions. Scientificevidencecontinues to show that human activities (primarily the human burning of fossil fuels) have warmed Earth’s surface and its ocean basins, which in turn havecontinued to impact Earth’s climate. This is based on over a century of scientific evidence forming the structural backbone of today's civilization.https://science.nasa.gov/climate-change/scientific-consensus/its really weird that you accuse science of being "paid agitators" directly below your protest against a dissident scientific opinion
and then you make claims as to what I might say about them. silly stuff zip.
if scientists "pander to those who pay the money" they would lose all credibility.
from what you've written zip, you really don't understand science at all.
