I wouldn't bother reading a study done by an oil company. The chance of bias is too high.
I wouldn't bother reading a study done by a govt linked entity. The chance of bias is too high.
EDIT:Govt: Global Warming will destroy the world unless you pay more taxes & let me micromanage your life
Govt Scientist: It's true, govt scientists would never lie to you
ascent: It's true
GideonGono: Prove it
ascent: If I tell you, you won't believe it.
Big Oil: LIES! Noxious fumes are good for you
GideonGono: Prove it
Big Oil Scientist: It's just true. Big Oil Scientists would never lie.
This is the state of the climate change debate. No useful conclusions can be drawn from this IMO.
Like I've repeatedly said, I read science publications, and the overall sense I get from such reading is that science is overwhelmingly on the side of anthropogenic climate change.
So you don't have specific evidence? M'kay.
If I provided you with some particular page, document, etc., you would simply claim that I cherry picked that document.
I give up. My logic is no match for your mind reading skills.
The rest... tl;dr. It's useless when you ignore repeated calls for evidence