You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Indeed, like all science (not just climate), hypotheses do play a role in proposal evaluation by other scientists. That's not the same thing as saying that the research is being done "for all the money" or any other kind of similarly uninformed statement.
If the argument is, scientists writing grants tend to back theories they believe to be true, and that the reviewers believe to be true... I'll agree with that. But I'll also ask you what other system would possibly make any sense.
The point being made is that we need to remain skeptical of any study being performed, as they are all prone to this bias. In terms of climate change, oil companies funded studies are disregarded due to this bias, while studies backed by the green agenda are accepted as clean.
By "Green Agenda" you mean — all studies not sponsored by Big Oil? I mean, come on man, you can't be this naive, can you? You really believe that all scientists are in on a big Green Agenda, and that good old Big Oil is the straight-shooter here?
Science has its own self-enforced mechanisms for evaluating hypotheses. What Santorum and others are advocating is essentially, for purely political reasons, throwing out conclusions that have been confirmed again and again, by multitudes of scientists globally.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
