Now we can move away from the concept of PROOF.... we might get somewhere!
Yes there IS a very VERY strong 'scientific CONCENSUS', as you rightly put it!
Taking science as a 'democracy', it's an 'election LANDSLIDE'!
The VAST majority of 'climate' scientists, weathermen, geologists, and all OTHER 'branches' of science involved with the subject have not the SLIGHTEST doubt that climate change IS occurring at a FAR faster range than we would expect when looking at the histoirical records.
They also agree, in the same sort of numbers, that it is towards a WARMER climate for the earth as a whole!
However, in line with ALL of the concepts behind the 'scientific method', there WILL be low numbers of similar scientists who will argue that it is NOT occurring! This is NOT a surprise! There really ARE 'scientists' continually challenging all the OTHER 'concencuses' (is that the right 'plural'?)... and they will also be producing good EVIDENCE and good HYPOTHESES which 'PROVE' that it's NOT happening! Staggeringly, there are STILL scientists doing work to show that cigarrettes DON'T affect your chances of getting lung disease!
However, the VAST VAST VAST majority AGRRE that it IS happening and, by the 'rules' of science, it is therefore 'common ground' that it IS happening!
There is NOT *AS* MUCH 'concencus' that mankind IS producing significant effects on the climate. However; very, VERY few would doubt that we ARE having SOME effect on climate! The argument does NOT 'turn' on whether it IS happening but whether it is a LARGE effect or a small one! It's also whether there IS anything that we COULD do to CHANGE it BACK AGAIN. However, again, the concensus IS for such an 'anthropomorphic' effect! However, it's not a 'landslide' this time so much as a damned strong 'WIN'!
We really HAVE left the 'era' where climate change is 'up for discussion amongst' 'scientists' at the moment. What's being discussed now is how BIG an effect, how FAST it's happening, how far that change will GO and if we can DO anything about it! Plus discussions about WHAT we SHOULD do!
Again, do not take MY word for it! Go and READ something credible about it! New Scientist is NOT a 'lacky' of the science world: it really IS a sort of 'maverick' in the same way that the 'Sun' is a maverick 'newspaper' amongst the others. It really IS easy to read and understand and it's damned good FUN to read!
********
Think of this another way: how much would you rely on the views of someone about KARTS if that person had never driven one, never studied karting, watched karting or read ANYTHING about it from people who KNOW about karting but held their views on karting simply from what they had seen on 'day time tv'?
If you DON'T read even the simplest 'science digest', how can you feel that you hold even partially informed views?
Ian
|
|