View Single Post
Old 08-20-2007, 01:24 PM   #91
Burninator
Franchise Player
 
Burninator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo View Post
Now ... to back up. I'm not saying all proponents are on the take or that they're dishonest ... far from it. But this discredit anyone that doubts the science thing by linking them to industry is just goofy.

The basis of Science is to question, rethink, adjust, get more informed, alter your hypothesis and continue to revisit the facts.

Words like "the science is in" is dangerous in that it's capping an ongoing issue that isn't finite in any way shape or form.
But what is the reason that one side is getting the vast majority of the funding? They seem to have a valid theory? Political/environmental group influence? Scientific conspiracy? Al Gore? It would also be interesting to find out if the difference between the funding has always been so broad.

There is usually a simple answer. I would tend to favour the reasoning that the theory getting the funding is doing the best work. Best work in that the results are standing up to validation and are working with the other validated theories. I'll draw the parallel between the ever popular evolution versus creation debate. There is a good reason creationist "scientists" are largely ignored by the rest of the scientific community. There is a good reason the funding between the two is drastically separated. Not the best example, but I am sure you see what I am getting at.
Burninator is offline   Reply With Quote