I personally equate the global warming advocates with ecological agenda minded folks more
than conspiracy theorists. I see how perhaps there is a grey area but reserve the right to maintain the
thought pattern that consipracy theorists are somehow a different breed.
It might be the scientist in me, but I always fall back on the premise that real science is about observation and prediction. In most of these discussions you rarely see the words "hypothesis" and "theory". Everybody has data and statistics, but very few can leverage those things to build a predictable model.
Meteorologists and geologists have very challenging issues with predictability in their respective fields. The systems they observe are so fantastically dynamic that it's very challenging to collect enough data to build a predictable model.
I guess since this thread had a mention of geology, conspiracy theorists, and humans being able to acutely affect nature that I lumped them all together. I was trying more to demonstrate that these folks are quick to point fingers but lack any ability to predict. So when they say a giant hornking magnet created earthquakes that happened in the past, then it should be assumed that they could predict the same result each time. Unfortunately, that's not usually the case.
Oh, and I didn't know the admins were silencing the meteorologists on the boards!
I guess I won't say anything more.
It's probably a conspiracy!