Why do the major scientific institutions put the subject of Global Warming under 'junk science'?

Is this another designer cause? MIT, Cal Tech, Lilly Inst., and many more of the real research institutions don't take the idea that humans are the cause of a Global Warming condition, seriously. This is not to say that many real scientist have had to address this designer cause in order to get research money to work as scientist. Much like cancer research and Aids un spendable amount of research funds.

for TychaBrahe, judging from you picture and the certainty of your answer, I'm throwing out all my research and following your birdbrain into the future.

Climate studies are relatively young and very complex, therefore it is difficult to conclusively prove. People have only been recording temperatures accurately for a few hundred years - and doing it on a global scale has been going on for less than a century. Whether it's really happening at all is in question. Then there's the question of whether it's causally linked to human greenhouse gas emissions or if it's just part of a naturally occurring cycle.

So there is evidence, but it's not considered 'substantial' enough. On the scale of the scientific method, most people consider global warming somewhere between a hypothesis and a theory. That's one reason why getting funding for global warming research is about as tough as funding SETI - it's seen as a pet project that a couple of kooks are obsessed with, but no real substance.

Ordinarily, you would think that serious research institutions would want to pour money into the unanswered questions, especially those with earth-shaking consequenses. The other reason for lack of funding is that research institutions get their research money from the government or the corporate world - where the idea of global warming is very unpopular. Everyone wants to be remembered as the one who sponsored the research that found the cure for AIDS, nobody wants to be the one that discovered that people can't drive SUVs anymore. So corporations and government agencies will turn a blind eye to global warming research - dismissing it as a mere crackpot theory - until there is solid, incontrivertable evidence that science can beat them over their heads with - and that evidence is difficult to come by. Environmentally interested groups simply don't have enough economic or political clout to persuade research institutions to pay attention to global warming.

Global warming is really a shortsightedness.It is really short period gases collection,leading to warming effects.Ice cap loss or sea level rising are contradictory.Actually,this warming is controlled by sun fissions and angle of radiations,which in some zones ,may increase for a period. Report It

http://www.istl.org/01-fall/in... for a sample of serious government and private scientific research into climate change and global warming. It IS being taken seriously. Report It

You are mistaken. The majority of scientists do believe in global warming.

As for taking it seriously, if you mean taking drastic steps to ensure that the next generation of New Yorkers aren't paddling to work down Wall Street, well that is a different thing. Americans are a reactive people, not a proactive people, and unless it starts affecting the bottom line, we aren't going to do anything about it.

I think you need to look deeper.

web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2005/hurricanes...

an article from MIT news office on how hurricanes are growing fiercer because of global warming.

web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/outreach....

among other things, documents the establishment of a 'global warming outreach program at MIT.

So, your axioms are wrong. People are researching the subject. The jury isn't in, but it isn't considered 'junk science' as you state. What it is is developing science. And one can't just jump ahead to conclusions on either side of the question.

Here is a piece from MIT's Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences that seems to contradict you:

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2005/hurri...

And one from CalTech that implies you are mistaken:

http://news.com.com/Bacteria+froze+the+E...

What was your question again?