The run - up in
climate science funding is rather modest compared to other
areas of science funding, and a more reasonable interpretation
of the funding picture isn't that
climate scientists are trying to act alarmed in order to run up their funding, but rather that they (we) are trying to run up funding because they actually are alarmed and feel that the
subject needs to be understood better.
We'll present a couple illustrations before we'll get to the actual publication we hope to discuss — one that compares methodology
of science - based and «
science - denying»
climate websites but that also touches on a
subject we personally find far more interesting: what's actually going on in the Arctic, an
area that is not only experiencing major physical consequences
of climate change, but that is subsequently also set to be a stage for a cascade
of ecological consequences
of this
climate change — both in the Arctic tundra biome and in the adjacent Arctic marine ecosystem.