Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I think it's a shame that this topic has been moved to debating whether or not a scientist knows more than a ditch digger ...
I think we can put that to rest ... unless the topic is ditches we can can conclude that a scientist in the field of global science probably knows a thing or two.
However, that doesn't mean that this scientist is right about whatever theory they hold dear to their hearts at the moment as hypothesis are likely changing as fast as the climate itself.
I'm not a pro-pollution guy, but I do think that there is a rush to judgement on this, and you hate to see focus and funds devoted almost exclusively to only one area when said area is far from proven to the extent of gravity.
Is the NASA mistake the end of global warming? Of course not. But I do think since the ranking was a hot button for a lot of global warming supporters including the opening of Gore's movie I do think it might be an assistance in getting people to slow down and really understand this before wasting a whole lot of money on solutions that many experts feel will solve nothing.
I don't want to drown or burn to a crisp either, believe me.
|
That's the disadvantage right there I think. One side: the man-made climate change and the need to address it side, seems required to have conclusive proof. Other wise it's just rushing in and ruining economies, even if there's very little proof of that. An impossible position, there are still people that believe the world is flat!
The other side of the coin seems to be satisfied with a minority of dissent from different sources and then it's; ok lets sit back and wait, steady steady.
I see your point, I just don't feel the science; as you wisely put it becuase it changes/evolves, will ever be "in" in a stable palatable report form, collated and stapled for a desk.