"Both SCM and PSI agree bad science and misrepresentation of data has led poorly-trained climate ‘experts’ to wrongly conclude there exists a dangerous human impact on earth’s climate requiring urgent global action.
PSI’s Hertzberg, a former US Navy meteorologist and respected climate analyst praises Beauzamy and his French colleagues for their paper which finds that there is “not a single fact, figure or observation that leads us to conclude that the world‘s climate is in any way disturbed.’”
This has long been a clearly political issue, with advocates of each side (often mere laymen) trying to argue the scientific merits in public debate. But their interest is not really "scientific." There are differing political agendas at stake.
You don't see that with the hundreds of ongoing scientific debates that permeate all branches of science. This particular article goes into a number of scientific details questioning the validity of the popular view, but no one who's already convinced otherwise will pay the least bit attention to those details. The will instead take the shopworn track of trying to impugn the motives of the French mathematicians (and anyone else who doesn't share their prejudices on the topic).
The mathematicians conclude:
We are fighting for a cause (reducing CO2 emissions) that serves absolutely no purpose, in which we alone believe, and which we can do nothing about. You would probably have to go quite a long way back in human history to find such a mad obsession.
It is also noted that:
Alexander Cockburn, a columnist for the Nation Magazine in a series of articles which I referred to in my chapter of the Slayers book, has written as follows:
"In a couple of hundred years historians will be comparing the frenzies over our supposed human contribution to global warming to the tumults at the latter end of the tenth century as the Christian millennium approached. Then as now, the doomsters identified human sinfulness as the propulsive factor in the planet's downward slide. Then as now a buoyant market throve on fear. The Roman Catholic Church sold indulgences like checks. The sinners established a line of credit against bad behavior and could go on sinning. Today a world market in "carbon credits" is in formation. Those whose "carbon footprint" is small can sell their surplus carbon credits to others less virtuous than themselves.
"The modern trade is as fantastical as the medieval one. There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of carbon dioxide is making any contribution to the world's present warming trend. The greenhouse fearmongers rely on unverified, crudely oversimplified models to finger mankind's sinful contribution ---- and carbon trafficking, just like the old indulgences, is powered by fear, guilt, credulity, cynicism, and greed, etc.
So, from this side too, cynicism, greed, guilt, etc. is imputed to those who hold a contrary view.
What else is new with politics, eh?