The thing is though, I can go to Europe and see the mass graves and all the other evidence with my own eyes. I cannot do the same thing with a scientific theory.
To me, the better analogy with the Holocost Deniers is the few people that are also denying that Global Warming is happening. I think most of us here do indeed agree that the Earth is getting warmer. What is in question here is what the causes are, and how significant each cause is.
I offer the following example not because I have facts, but just a "what if" scenario.
Let's say we find out 50 years from now that Global warming is not caused by human production of CO2, but instead caused by the increased use of electronic components that we as humans use in our daily lives causing the magnetic belts to shift, allowing more thermal radiation from the sun to heat our planet. In such a scenario, where we find this out in a world where we all drive Hyrdogen and electric powered vehicles, and said vehicles are the cause of the warming. We would look back at the 20th and early 21st century theories of global warming the same way we look at the use of leeches in medicine centuries ago.
The problem as I see it is that when anybody tries to suggest that we look at all the options before leaping to conclusions, they are almost treated like we treated supposed witches 300 years ago. I can see why some scientists who have alternate theories may just keep their mouths shut to avoid embarrasment.
We laugh now at footage of 19th century inventors trying to make heavier than air flying machines. But if it wasn't for those people who tried and failed, who is to say if the Wright brothers would have created their succesfull airplane. In the same way, let's explore the options. Obviously some people will be found out to be wrong. But let's not assume that because most people believe one theory that it must be true.
|