Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bingo
Seems the assumption of global warming is the one that doesn't want to hear any sort of opposition. Only natural for enviromental scientists to be pro-environment, the silent middle might have some pretty serious reservations, but don't want to be branded pro industry or pro pollution for questioning what has become a run table.
|
In my case, I think it is a weighing of potential consequences.
If the warming is cyclical, then at the worse thing that will have happened is lots of money will have been spent (or wasted, depending on your point of view) on reducing pollution/greenhouse gases.
If the warming is human generated and causing dangerous climate changes and we don't do anything, then the worst thing that can happen is global ecological disaster.
Given the choices, I'd prefer to avoid the latter potential consequence.