> There is a very strong incentive to create plausible scientific models that show climate change is not a problem if that is in fact the case. I guess that pr

> There is a very strong incentive to create plausible scientific models that show climate change is not a problem if that is in fact the case. I guess that proving the absence of something is harder, and less rewarding in terms of recognition, than proving its presence. Many climate studies are interspersed with "may", "could", "likely"- but to prove an absence you need a higher degree of certainty. Also, there is of course a publication bias- research that doesn't produce significant results is less likely to be published. "We modeled the impact of global warming on this crop, and it didn't seem to change" is not as sexy as "the model for this staple crop failed spectacularly and at current temperature projections hundreds of million will die of hunger in 30 years".