lets agree that both sides have something to gain and move on. This silliness about the "Big Green" lobby is distracting from a meaningful discussion about glob

lets agree that both sides have something to gain and move on. This silliness about the "Big Green" lobby is distracting from a meaningful discussion about global warming and how seriously to take it. I disagree with this. The main thrust against any refutation of human caused global warming is always that the author is in the paid service of an oil company, lobby group. You cannot have it both ways. You can't allow people to use that argument to brand people who refute or discount human-caused global warming as paid skeptics, and then brush it aside when the argument is used in reverse.