"Science" vs Science

Two websites come down on separate sides of the global climate change debate. One the one side is Friends of Science (FoS) and on the other Grist. While FoS attempts to disprove the science behind climate change, Grist offers ways to talk to and convince skeptics of the realness and dangers of global climate change. For me, the most glaring difference between the two sites was the citations. FoS had absolutely no cited evidence. They only cherry-picked conditional sentences out of published reports in a way, that I’m sure, misrepresents the actual point and intention of the reports. The Grist article, however, is full of hyperlinks to reports from numerous reputable organizations in the field that back up what was said in the article.

Maybe I’ve been in college too long, but for me, it’s hard to take FoS seriously without cited evidence from qualified researchers. From my experience, if the argument is even remotely valid, there are pages and pages written that you can use to back yourself up. A lack of research raises serious red flags for me. I did a little more research on the group. According to a 2007 article in the Toronto Star, the Canadian biased Friends of Science receives more than one third of their annual operating budget from the oil industry. (http://www.thestar.com/article/175673). Which causes me to question their motives and connections.