Corrupted is IMO too strong of word, but it has an influence. Not just on people's statements, or over even opinions, but also about what research gets done, what people set off to try to demonstrate.
The effect (on both sides of the issue) is normally (but not always) too small to reasonably be called corruption in my opinion, but it is real, and is essentially the same on both sides.
If you want to argue that there is no effect, I think that would be pretty hard. Also it would tend to undermine any argument you made about research funded by those with the opposite opinion.
I'm a member of the great GW scam apparently
When have you seen me use that term. Scam is also too strong of term (and even if it wasn't, posting on SI would hardly be enough to get a check, the money goes to researchers, and people like Al Gore, who are more prominent in presenting the case, and also who buy in to various carbon credit plans and subsidized "green energy" efforts.) It not mostly a scam, (at least except for some subsets like the carbon credit plans, and maybe some of the data presented), its often sincere but rigid belief and group think and politics, which distorts things, but people think they are doing what's right and good for the most part, they just let that belief excuse sloppiness and overstating of their case, and trying to shut down debate. |
