Andean toads have been dying off for over twenty years. What could be the cause? I'll bet you can guess what was blamed:
It looked as if one research team was a winner
in 2006 when global warming was identified as the “trigger” in the extinctions by the authors of a much-cited paper in Nature. The researchers said
they had found a clear link between unusually warm years and the vanishing of mountainside frog populations.
Well, maybe not:
Now, in the March 25 issue of PLoS Biology, another team argues that the die-offs of harlequins and some other amphibians reflect the spread and repeated introductions of the chytrid fungus. They question the analysis linking the disappearances to climate change. In interviews and e-mail exchanges, Dr. Pounds and the lead author of the new paper, Karen R. Lips of Southern Illinois University, disputed each other’s analysis. Experts who have researched the amphibian said neither group had enough evidence to nail down its case and warned that this normal tussle over scientific details should not distract from the reality that humans are clearly roiling biology in ways important and yet poorly understood.
This is just another example of how the politics of global warming influences the science. When the Left says that certain scientists can't be trusted because they're on the payrolls of corporations with a vested interest in a given issue they conveniently forget that the careers of all scientists rise and fall on the grants they get and right now global warming is hot (if you'll excuse the pun). The fact is that climactic science is far from being understood well enough that conclusions about toad death being caused by global warming and other such similar "scientific findings" is specious at best.
The Left is correct to a degree that you should follow the money. But the money frequently flows to their pet causes, too.
Cross-linked at Liberty Pundit