5. "Censored" is appropriate when the science is being suppressed ...
... purely to benefit the powerful bodies involved in the suppression.
Especially true when it is done explicitly to reduce the pressure to agree to
*anything* at the next international climate farce, sorry, "negotiations".
>> In other parts of the summary, objections from rich nations resulted in the
>> removal of a line saying: “In 2010, ten countries accounted for about 70 per
>> cent of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes.”
>> They also demanded, and won, removal of a line reporting that ethical mitigation
>> of climate change would require the developed world to transfer “hundreds of
>> billions of dollars per year” to non-OECD countries to invest in green technologies.
>> Objections from "upper middle income" countries resulted in the deletion of
>> a graph that showed the stunning rise in emissions from those countries in
>> the decade to 2010, compared with other parts of the world.
Physics, chemistry and the biological response to changes really aren't interested
in "consensus" and the longer that the chief polluters deny the problem, the worse
will be the result.