Originally Posted by woj

You are missing one minor detail that there are whole industries dedicated to "global warming", scientific journals whose only purpose is to discuss it, conferences about it, even college degrees in "environmental engineering", countless of people who spent their whole careers dedicated to it, etc...

so there is strong self-serving bias to keep the charade going... what motivation is there to disprove it? there is no $$ to be made from proving there is no man made "global warming"... but there is ton of $$ to be made by playing along...
(if there is no problem, obviously there is no $$ to be made by solving it)

it's kinda like expecting a priest to admit in church that he isn't 100% sure god exists...

would you ever expect to see a speaker in church discuss how it's possible that god might not be real? Why would you expect a "scientific" journal whose only purpose is to discuss global warming, to publish papers disproving it?