@Leo
Umm;I didn't say I agree with the Japanese. I really do not know for a fact what is causing global warming. Virtually all the information I have is from the media. Not having read any scientific reports arguing human causation,and lacking the science to interpret most, I'm in no position to reach a really informed conclusion .
@thoughtful
For all practical purposes science does work on consensus.Whether it's germ theory, Newtonian physics, or the laws of thermodynamics.It's the consensus which is taught in schools and universities.
All disciplines have a dominating power paradigm,this is especially apparent in science,where change tends to be revolutionary rather than revolutionary.Vested interests always fight to maintain the status quo on many levels. This situation has changed a bit since the church lost legal power.IE dissenting thinkers are no longer usually killed. However they may still be ridiculed and suffer other consequences.
That hundreds of scientists claim the debate on climate change has ended does not make it so.Nor does mass agreement infer truth. I accept the view of the apparent majority,as it seems reasonable,and because it's in my best interest.IE a kind of Pascal's Wager; I think there's more to lose if I disagree and am wrong.---Plus I'm pretty underwhelmed by the opposition.
Umm;I didn't say I agree with the Japanese. I really do not know for a fact what is causing global warming. Virtually all the information I have is from the media. Not having read any scientific reports arguing human causation,and lacking the science to interpret most, I'm in no position to reach a really informed conclusion .
@thoughtful
For all practical purposes science does work on consensus.Whether it's germ theory, Newtonian physics, or the laws of thermodynamics.It's the consensus which is taught in schools and universities.
All disciplines have a dominating power paradigm,this is especially apparent in science,where change tends to be revolutionary rather than revolutionary.Vested interests always fight to maintain the status quo on many levels. This situation has changed a bit since the church lost legal power.IE dissenting thinkers are no longer usually killed. However they may still be ridiculed and suffer other consequences.
That hundreds of scientists claim the debate on climate change has ended does not make it so.Nor does mass agreement infer truth. I accept the view of the apparent majority,as it seems reasonable,and because it's in my best interest.IE a kind of Pascal's Wager; I think there's more to lose if I disagree and am wrong.---Plus I'm pretty underwhelmed by the opposition.
