 The evidence that humans are causing the climate to warm is overwhelming. 97% of climate science research papers that express an opinion on this agree. This warming is increasing risk for the natural world and human society. And yet fewer than half of United States citizens are concerned about climate change. And one in five are doubtful that it's even happening. Why is there still public controversy about the science of human cause global warming? We are all swayed by advertising and media. Usually we think of them as trying to sell us products. But organized vested interests are also trying to sell us opinions. Tracking the money, funding certain media is a good way to find out who is trying to sway public opinion on climate. People who have tracked the money found something interesting. These organizations are not selling an opinion. They are selling confusion itself. This tactic is common and has been extensively documented in a book by Naomi Oreskes and Eric Conway titled Merchants of Doubt. Selling doubt was a tactic pioneered by the tobacco industry with the aim of confusing the public about the dangers of cigarettes. This happened long after the connection of smoking to cancer was well established by science. Merchants of Doubt want the public to stay confused about climate because they gain most from maintaining the status quo. That is for humans to keep smoking or keep burning fossil fuels for the majority of our energy needs. Coal and oil are the products of the fossil fuel industry and they want us to stay hooked on those products. Tracking the money that supports Merchants of Doubt often leads to that industry. An expose by the Union of Concerned Scientists listed some of the ways that the oil company ExxonMobil waged the most successful and sophisticated science-developed campaign since Big Tobacco's campaign against the dangers of smoking. One tactic known as information laundering used seemingly independent front groups that pretended to be doing science. Instead they were conducting public relations for the company. Virtually all of these front groups publicized the misleading work of the same small number of people. These people typically serve as board members or scientific advisors for each of these groups. This tactic creates the illusion that there are many organizations and many people with doubts about global warming. For example, look at the ring of spokespeople around this think tank. Notice how they're linked to countless other political think tanks. Exxon funneled about $16 million to these front groups who paid scientists to persuade the general public and the media that there was no scientific consensus on global warming. Behind the scenes, a few fossil fuel interests have funded the campaign to manufacture doubt about human-caused global warming. For example, from 2005 to 2008, ExxonMobil spent $8.9 million to fund climate misinformation groups. Foundations controlled by Koch Industries, which is also heavily invested in fossil fuels, contributed $24.9 million to these groups during those years. Most oil companies have adopted public statements accepting the science of climate change. However, most of these companies still fund groups that lobby against government regulation of fossil fuel emissions and or spread climate science disinformation. Much of the funding has gone to political think tanks that often have science-y sounding names like the International Climate Science Coalition and Friends of Science. These think tanks are great at public relations with slick websites and presentations, but they constantly get the science wrong. Instead of accurately presenting the science, they misrepresent it in a way that suits their agenda. Unlike science, which is open and transparent, these think tanks hide their fossil fuel-based funding sources. The books and reports published by these think tanks are often written by people with little or no scientific training. They often like to portray themselves as David fighting the goliath of mainstream climate science. But in reality, they have the advantage of financial support from the deep pockets of the fossil fuel industry. Many people are instinctively reluctant to accept the science of climate change because they don't like to propose solutions. The emergence of doubt helped these people justify rejection of the accepted science by providing misleading arguments that look like they come from credible scientific sources. However, opinion surveys show that scientists are still among the most widely trusted groups of people in society and that this sense of trust spans the political spectrum. When it comes to global warming, people trust the experts, climate scientists. As studies have shown, 97% of climate scientists accept that humans are the main cause of global warming. The overwhelming opinion of a trusted group of genuine experts cannot forever be brushed aside, even by a well-funded campaign of false experts cynically manufacturing doubt where none exists.