Riverman-- your quote "Independant scientists and climatologists on the other hand have very little if anything to gain by reporting warming trends " ignores one thing-- unless these scientists are truly independent-- that is, they receive no funding from anyone and work for no one but themselves-- then they truly have an agenda, "something to gain" in your words.

Scientists and scholars, the Ph.D's folks quote so often, have two burning needs: funding and the need for publication, and that's their agenda, or at least one of them. Without these, they don't have a job, they don't get tenure, they don't get professional recognition.

The best way for them to obtain funding and get published is to propose a theory that is radical, a predictor of doom, and needs more research. Unfortunately, people will pick up on these theories and report them as facts.

That's why any report needs to be viewed critically-- and certain basic questions need to be answered about the research as well as the person(s) doing it. That's not to say that the research is fraudulent or intentionally biased, but the potential is always there, and one must be aware of it.

Keith