I'm a little baffled how and why Thunderf00t is "conspiracy". I find him a mixed bag: observant of engineering flaws, prone to strawman atheism, fearless on social issues... and now this -- credulous of global warming.

I have no real conclusion about global warming. It seems possible. It seems likely. However, I'm never invited into a discussion of climate science: I'm asked to choose sides in a political debate. Not only is the existence of global warming accepted by those pressuring me into taking a side, but so are the "solutions" -- which all seem more like financial instruments than ecological engineering. When I'm reluctant to choose a side, I'm castigated as a "denier".

To me, "climate change" isn't a scientific problem. It's a rhetorical problem. I get the sense that someone is being dishonest and badgering me. Yes, I do want to shut down that type of "debate". More money for climatologists? Sure. Planting forests? Why not? Carbon exchanges? No, thanks. Overheated rhetoric? No, not at all. Changing the perception of "science" from "free inquiry" to "technocracy by an unelected international elite"? Well, you can fuck right off, then.

Thunderf00t is not a dumb guy. He's able to dissect herd mentalities well, but like all of us, he has his blind spots. He chooses to lambaste the most obvious targets rather than address a philosophical issue. Fine. He needs clicks. He has a self-conception he doesn't want abused. I'm more interested in his exploration of climate than his political engagement.