Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
There is no debate. I know you think you are being reasonable by being open to all sides of the argument, but the question is scientifically settled for all intents an purposes. The fact that so many people believe the question is not settled, shows how successful the denialists have been in creating a false controversy. Their motives are not scientific, but are political and economic.
|
Well....obviously it's not settled if you have credible scientists giving the oppossing view.
There are also a variety of sub-issues that remain far from settled. How much is the climate actually changing? What impact does human activity have on this change?
Ulimately, we shouldn't need to know these answers to push an agenda for conservation. Relying on oil, a limited resource, is bad for so many reasons. Humans should be doing there best to find alternative energy sources regardless of climate change.
The fact of the matter is that climate change is so complex that it's beyond our current scientific understanding. You can try and break it down into layman's terms and simplified pictures, but that in no way represents the entire issue. The issue has attracted so many reactionary responses that it's begining to become totally obscurred. You not only need to "believe" in climate change, you need to belive in a specific and uncompromissing variety.
Like I said before, issue is now a political one. I'd even take it a step further and say that the issue has now become a religious one. Hard core views on both sides of the debate have more in common with anti-evolutionists.