I guess I feel it would be easier to trust the motives of skeptics if they weren't constantly shifting the goalposts and fighting the data. A couple years ago t

I guess I feel it would be easier to trust the motives of skeptics if they weren't constantly shifting the goalposts and fighting the data. A couple years ago there was plenty of denial that climate change was happening at all. Now the data has made that position indefensible so now they seek to cast doubt on what the impacts will be. I'm all for good science and skepticism, and for legitimate issues with the models. But all of this reeks of the same type of "science" that tobacco companies bankrolled to fight the lung cancer findings decades ago. Their motivations just make it very difficult to take them seriously.