Atman,

You will find that the "dictators" are usually operating in partnership with the IMF and the World Bank. These organisations and others of their ilk represent Western corporate interests and are more interested in "privatising" utilities for profit (that then makes it's way into the pockets of the ruling elite of the country and outside borders into the wallets of corporations), than providing them for the benefit of the general population.
So it seems that the skeptic/denialist/contrarian movement which is so often funded by big oil or other corporate interests definitely has a vested interest in painting it's own picture.

What we have here, as climate scientist Judith Curry suggested last year, is a lucrative (for many of the players) “feedback loop between politics, science, and science funding."

As a result, it was inevitable the IPCC would end up promoting precisely the policy option (CO2 stabilization) favoured by the UNFCCC, “an overconfident assessment of the importance of greenhouse gases in future climate change”, etc.

When an accurate history of UN’s long involvement with this issue is written, it will be clear how eagerly – and prematurely - the developing world (and other players) embraced it, years before the IPCC ruled (incorrectly) the science was “settled”.

It will be a case study in self-interest ("climate debt"), politicisation of science and entrenchment of confirmation bias on a grand scale.

Just once I would like to see some evidence of the oil/coal/ corporate sponsorship furfy that keeps appearing. I bet Joe Nova, Ian Plimer, Anthony Watts, Christopher Monkton, Pilke senior and junior and a raft of others who have the temerity to postulate a degree of insecurity in the findings and motives of the IPCC organisations, would be more than happy to receive even one hundreth of the funding directed to the AGW proponents.
KAPE.... Could you post again please? whilst I am sure there is a valid argument in there somewhere, I got a little lost.

KAEP is right, the existing 75% miilion a year growth of over population guarantees more global warming and a possible world war.Our planet is exposed to various possible catastrophic destinies apart from runaway global warming from fossil fuel emissions (340 billion tonnes since 1850.) and runaway melting of the permafrost (1672 billion tonnes ff Methane and CO2). There is no chance of containing the warming impact Unless the UN has an expanded role.

Mother Nature may throw a big rock at us which could reduce us to a patch of deep frozen solar gravel.” Because asteroids are much smaller than planets, detection of them is currently difficult. The distinction between planets and asteroids is not very clear. Large asteroids such as Ceres and Vesta could possibly be classified as planets, because they have not been destroyed since the formation of the solar system.

Physicists; astromoners are finding these issues interesting .Firstly the the Issue of black holes and dark matter is now attracting a great deal of iscientific interest of how this weird “matter” imight enter the solar system in the distant future and do what is shown in some science fiction films.

Secondly, Physicists and astromoners and astronouts in space, have been scanning the solar sytem for objects in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter and found 32,000 asteroids many of which if knocked from there current orbits in collisions with other asteroids and the gravitation fields of Jupiter, Saturn and their moons some of which are a big as the earths moon. Why are most comments to this discusson so negative dont they knowasteroid impacts have happened before happeneds before The Astromoners also detected 20 new comets. NASA websites discuss these possibilities as being very real .

Poirot.
Please, pretty please, give some evidence, real evidence, as to the financial support being given by oil, coal, gas and corporate organisations to people who express doubt about the CO2/warming link.
Hard data required:source of money, recipient(s) of that money and the sums involved.
You are a mature person, you should know better than to rant on without giving chapter and verse to support your convictions about payments to climate skeptics.
Your wild statements on this issue are what I would expect from radio Pyongyang. Very disappointing coming from you.

A clip for starters Poirot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaKm89eVhoE

The Koch brothers funded this study too, but guess what happened?

http://tinyurl.com/3omzzfb

So called "sceptics" shooting themselves in the feet, again.